July - August 2017

Page 1





Preventing Budget Burn Since 2006 Security guard services are a large line item in your LP budget. Shouldn’t you have the tools to track your budget burn rate? Our unique management approach, purpose-built tools, and single source invoicing help to control your guard budget spending while providing a transparent view of your guard program nationwide.

866.403.9630 • www.protossecurity.com


Revisiting Timeless Topics, Exploring New Ones


By Jack Trlica


Product Protection Benefit-denial solution saves

Random Lessons from the Room: Part One

By David E. Zulawski, CFI, CFE and Shane G. Sturman, CFI, CPP

Rent-A-Center millions in smartphone losses


By Garett Seivold, Contributing Writer

Brick-and-Mortar Is Not Dead; Amazon Just Proved It By Tom Meehan, CFI



LPM “Magpie” Award: Applauding Excellence

From Retail LP to Solution Provider to Restaurant Brand Protection An interview with


Adopting an Intervention Assessment Framework in LP By Adrian Beck, Walter Palmer, and Colin Peacock


Solving Access-Control Challenges by Engaging with Retailers

David Johnston of Dunkin’ Brands

With Ken Kuehler

By James Lee, LPC, Executive Editor

44 EVIDENCE-BASED LP Winning Loss Prevention By Read Hayes, PhD, CPP



Professional Membership: What’s in It for You?

LP Leaders of the Future? No Big Brain Required Benchmarking the next

By Christina Kendall

59 SOLUTIONS SHOWCASE - CONTROLTEK - CAP Index - Digilock - LP Innovations - Southern Imperial

generation of LP professionals

By Francis D’Addario, Dean Correia, and Sean Dettloff, Security Executive Council


Keeping Safety and Security Top of Mind By Jacque Brittain, LPC, and Kelsey Seidler



Access Control and the Case of the Missing Camera Whodunit stories from an

You Are a Good Guy, Gene Smith

LP investigator’s files

By Jim Lee, LPC

By Dave DiSilva, Contributing Writer





A Powerful Combination The Retail Equation and Sysrepublic are Appriss Retail Predictive retail analytics across a global footprint.

The Retail Equation - +1 (888) 371-1616 Sysrepublic - +1 (310) 802-3044 apprissretail.com


Revisiting Timeless Topics, Exploring New Ones T

his edition of the magazine has a wide-ranging selection of feature articles—from product protection to restaurant security to loss prevention professionals of the future to a detective-novel-like telling of access control. The article about Rent-A-Center’s product protection solution for smartphone losses in their rent-to-own stores is our cover story because it’s one of the first benefit-denial success stories we’ve heard. The concept of benefit denial as a means of making stolen products useless without an unlocking key has been discussed for quite some time. The Rent-A-Center team has put together an interesting approach for protecting smartphones that has saved the company millions of dollars (see page 15). Congratulations to them for putting a theory into practice. Our executive interview this time is with David Johnston, who started his career in retail loss prevention, moved to the solution provider world, and came full circle back to retail. He describes his boomerang career on page 25 and his current role with Dunkin’ Brands—the iconic owner of franchise brands Dunkin’ Donuts and Baskin Robbins. He also provides a description of the Restaurant Loss Prevention and


Safety Association, his role as president, and its upcoming conference. It is not news that the role of loss prevention professionals is rapidly changing to meet the expanding needs of the retail industry. The magazine is collaborating with the Security Executive Council (SEC) to look at what the future asset protection professional will look like—what skill sets, education, and other attributes will be needed to fully contribute to the retail enterprise. Three members of the SEC faculty offer their observations of the current status of loss prevention and corporate risk management on page 37. More importantly, this article is a launching point for a benchmarking survey of all levels of our readership to get your views of what you think you need to do your job in the future. We encourage you not only to read the article, but also to contribute to the survey “LP in Transformation—What Is the Next Generation of You?” by visiting securityexecutivecouncil.com/ lpsec2017. The results of the survey will be reported in a future edition of the magazine. Last, but certainly not least, is a film noir-like telling of one loss prevention executive’s experience




with access control. Our friend Dave DiSilva has a thirty-year career in a variety of roles in multiple industry segments. Starting with a part-time security job with a hotel during college, he learned that understanding access control provided him a foundation for success in his career. He explains using numerous examples of incidents and investigations with a good deal of wit mixed with wisdom. Enjoy DiSilva’s writing on page 47 and learn some things about access control you may not know. When we first announced the concept of this magazine for loss prevention professionals in 2001, more than one person asked, “Are there enough things to write about to fill a magazine?” This edition is an example of both new and old topics that continue to inform and educate our readers. After sixteen years, we haven’t published a blank page yet.

Jack Trlica Managing Editor

ID #38450

ID #77864

Third visit to the store in a month

Shoplifted twice in six months

ID #15575

First time shopper

ID #36525

Shopped in our other location last month

Virtual Line Up The New Power in Observation Know when a previous troublemaker enters your store and how to monitor suspicious activity. Virtual Line Up sets a new standard in surveillance solutions. It will literally change the way you watch your customers. With highly-specialized, proprietary software, Virtual Line Up assigns an anonymous Tracking ID to each person that enters your store. It then recognizes that person at every visit. • Measure frequency and duration of visits • Monitor movements and suspicious activity • Differentiate between associates and guests • Receive alerts for potential problems Change the way you observe your customers. Call 631.686.2900 or email sales@clickitinc.com to get started right away.

An Unmatched Depth of Perspective

EDITORIAL BOARD Jim Carr, CFI Senior Director, Global Asset Protection, Rent-A-Center

David Lund, LPC Vice President of Loss Prevention, DICK’S Sporting Goods

Ray Cloud Senior Vice President, Loss Prevention, Ross Stores

John Matas Vice President, Asset Protection, Investigations & ORC, Macy’s

Francis D’Addario, CPP, CFE Emeritus Faculty Member, Strategic Influence and Innovation, Security Executive Council

Chris McDonald Senior Vice President, Loss Prevention, Compass Group NA

Charles Delgado, LPC Regional Vice President, Store Operations, Academy Sports Scott Draher, LPC Vice President, Loss Prevention, Safety, and Operations, Lowe’s Scott Glenn, LPC Chief Security Officer, Sears Holdings Tim Gorman Divisional Vice President, Loss Prevention, Asset Protection, and Business Continuity, Walgreens Barry Grant Chief Operating Officer, Canadian Images

Randy Meadows Senior Vice President, Loss Prevention, Kohl’s Melissa Mitchell, CFI Director of Asset Protection and Retail Supply Chain, LifeWay Christian Stores Dan Provost, LPC Vice President, Global Loss Prevention, Staples Tina Sellers, LPC Director of Loss Prevention, Retail Business Services LLC, an Ahold-Delhaize Company Mark Stinde, LPC Vice President, Asset Protection, 7-Eleven

Bill Heine Senior Director, Global Security, Brinker International

Paul Stone, LPC Vice President, Loss Prevention and Risk Management, Best Buy

Frank Johns, LPC Chairman, The Loss Prevention Foundation

Robert Vranek Vice President, Loss Prevention, Belk

Mike Lamb, LPC Vice President, Asset Protection, The Kroger Co.

Keith White, LPC Senior Vice President, Loss Prevention and Corporate Administration, Gap Inc.



700 Matthews Mint Hill Rd, Ste C Matthews, NC 28105 704-365-5226 office, 704-365-1026 fax MANAGING EDITOR Jack Trlica JackT@LPportal.com EXECUTIVE EDITOR James Lee, LPC JimL@LPportal.com EDITORIAL DIRECTOR, DIGITAL Jacque Brittain, LPC JacB@LPportal.com MANAGING EDITOR, DIGITAL Kelsey Seidler KelseyS@LPportal.com CONTRIBUTING WRITERS Adrian Beck Read Hayes, PhD, CPP Tom Meehan, CFI Walter Palmer, CFI, CPP, CFE Colin Peacock Maurizio P. Scrofani, CCSP, LPC Garett Seivold Gene Smith, LPC Shane G. Sturman, CFI, CPP Bill Turner, LPC David E. Zulawski, CFI, CFE CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER Kevin McMenimen, LPC KevinM@LPportal.com DIRECTOR OF DIGITAL OPERATIONS John Selevitch JohnS@LPportal.com SPECIAL PROJECTS MANAGERS Kat Houston, LPQ Justin Kemp, LPQ Karen Rondeau DESIGN & PRODUCTION SPARK Publications info@SPARKpublications.com CREATIVE DIRECTOR Larry Preslar ADVERTISING MANAGER Ben Skidmore 972-587-9064 office, 972-692-8138 fax BenS@LPportal.com SUBSCRIPTION SERVICES

Loss Prevention, LP Magazine, LP Magazine Europe, and LPM are service marks owned by the publishers and their use is restricted. All editorial content is copyrighted. No article may be reproduced by any means without expressed, written permission from the publisher. Reprints or PDF versions of articles are available by contacting the publisher. Statements of fact or opinion are the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the opinion of the publishers. Advertising in the publication does not imply endorsement by the publishers. The editor reserves the right to accept or reject any article or advertisement.



NEW OR CHANGE OF ADDRESS myLPmag.com POSTMASTER Send change of address forms to Loss Prevention Magazine P.O. Box 92558 Long Beach, CA 90809-2558 Loss Prevention aka LP Magazine aka LPM (USPS 000-710) is published bimonthly by Loss Prevention Magazine, Inc., 700 Matthews Mint Hill Rd, Ste C, Matthews, NC 28105. Print subscriptions are available free to qualified loss prevention and associated professionals in the U.S. and Canada at LPMsubscription.com. The publisher reserves the right to determine qualification standards. International print subscriptions are available for $99 per year payable in U.S. funds at circulation@LPportal.com. For questions about subscriptions, contact circulation@LPportal.com or call 888-881-5861. Periodicals postage paid at Matthews, NC, and additional mailing offices.

© 2017 Loss Prevention Magazine, Inc.


NEW TECHNOLOGIES F��� L��� F���� N�� W�� �� C����� C���� A� � G�����... L�������

Food Lion Grocery Store


Robbery of Customer Service Safes

3SI S�������


C�������� Food Lion, a grocery chain based in Salisbury, N.C., with more than 1,000 stores in ten Southeastern and Mid-Atlantic states, wanted to test new ways to protect their associates and assets when a store is the target of a robbery or burglary.


Tina Sellers, Director of Loss Prevention, knew about 3SI GPS Trackers and decided to test the Cash Tracker™ technology in select stores. On February 7, 2017, a robbery occurred at one of Food Lion’s locations, and local police were automatically alerted when the 3SI Cash Tracker for the store began to move away from the store location. Police used 3SI’s

tracking location technology to follow the criminals. When the Tracker stopped at a residence, police obtained a search warrant and used an RF Beacon to pinpoint the exact location of the Tracker within the house.


Four suspects were apprehended and all of the stolen money was recovered.

In addition to Cash Tracker™, 3SI also offers PharmaTracker®, Phone Tracker™, Tobacco Tracker™, Jewelry Tracker™ and more. 3sisecurity.com/gpstracking info@3sisecurity.com 844.474.0374

“We tested Cash Trackers in an effort to protect our associates and business, and have been extremely pleased with the initial results of this test,” said Tina Sellers, Director of Loss Prevention. “I strongly believe Cash Trackers are a cost-effective solution to help mitigate these situations in our stores.” - Tina Sellers, Director of Loss Prevention, Delhaize America

Recover Stolen Assets. Apprehend Criminals. Protec�ng: Phone, Convenience, Jewelry, Check Cashing Stores and Pharmacies

GPS Ac�vates and Tracks

Protected Cash or Asset Stolen

#SaferWorld 3sisecurity.com/gpstracking

Cash or Asset Recovered Criminal Apprehended







Join these great companies as an LP Magazine corporate sponsor. Email JackT@LPportal.com for more information. LP MAGAZINE | JULY–AUGUST 2017



Random Lessons from the Room: Part One C

onversations often take strange turns, leading where we never expect them to go. Such a conversation inspired this column discussing the lessons we’ve learned during tens of thousands of interviews. We opened this topic up to our interviewers, so they could also share things that they have learned over the years in the room.

The Truth Often Has Many Versions

The truth can be an elusive thing. Determining the truth can often be problematic even when there may be audiovisual evidence of what happened. Four cameras covered the slide of the runner as the third baseman took the throw and swung his mitt to touch the advancing runner. The umpire was carefully positioned and observed the play calling the runner out. The manager protested the call, and the umpires gathered to review the video evidence of the play. While the play was clearly close, after attempting to tag the runner out the third baseman pursued the runner reinitiating the tag when he reached third base. Immediately the announcers raised questions suggesting the third baseman had actually missed the tag. Depending on the camera angle, there was

Most of the problems in the interview are caused by the interviewer. These problems can vary, but ultimately they are the responsibility of the interviewer. It could be the tone of voice, word usage, strategy, failure to rationalize, or any of a dozen other things the interviewer is doing wrong. 12


by David E. Zulawski, CFI, CFE and Shane G. Sturman, CFI, CPP

Zulawski and Sturman are executives in the investigative and training firm of Wicklander-Zulawski & Associates (w-z.com). Zulawski is a senior partner, and Sturman is president. Sturman is also a member of ASIS International’s Retail Loss Prevention Council. They can be reached at 800-222-7789 or via email at dzulawski@w-z.com and ssturman@w-z.com. © 2017 Wicklander-Zulawski & Associates, Inc.

no independent verification that the umpire had blown the call. The end result—the base runner was out as the play was called. Sometimes the truth can be altered because of the position of the observer. In this case, the third-base umpire was in the best position to closely examine whether or not the third baseman actually made contact with the runner. Fans who were biased for the runner argued the third baseman’s actions after the attempted tag showed that he believed he had missed touching the runner. So the truth can change as a result of biases, assumptions, position, or other qualifiers, which might shade even the truthful witness’s testimony. Many times the guilty individual will intentionally shade the truth in an attempt to salvage his self-image or to reduce the seriousness of what he has done. For the investigator it is often difficult to know with absolute certainty what the real truth might be. Instead, the investigator has to use the physical evidence, witness testimony, or other information to piece together what is the most likely series of events.

Don’t Give Up Your Evidence

Since it can be difficult to tell when people are lying, shading the truth, fabricating events, or just omitting details that may incriminate them, the investigator can use what evidence is available to evaluate the stories, sequence of events, or alibis of the main players. If the individual was aware of all the information available to the investigator, he could begin to alter his story to match the evidence uncovered during the investigation. However, when the investigator withholds the evidence and allows the individual to tell his story, the evidence can help determine the veracity of the individual. One common problem during conversations with those suspected of wrongdoing is that the investigator contaminates a confession by talking about evidence, alluding to evidence, or using leading questions that infer the correct answer. Evidence can also be given up by using an incorrect assumptive question to obtain the first admission. For example, if the subject is suspected of creating fraudulent refunds to steal money, many investigators might ask for continued on page 14



continued from page 12

the first admission using this question—“What is the most number of fraudulent refunds you created to take money from the company?” If one was to use an assumptive question relating directly to the refund, you have indirectly told the subject what is most likely known and where his exposure in the investigation lies. This question may also infer that the investigator does not know about any other forms of cash thefts the employee has participated in. This results in the employee making fewer admissions because he doesn’t believe the investigator knows about the other areas of theft. Had the investigator used an assumptive question that said, “What is the most amount of money that you took from the company in the last year?” This question addresses a broad area of the investigation, which has revealed the employee stole money but not the method used to do so. The employee may now offer an admission to

For the investigator it is often difficult to know with absolute certainty what the real truth might be. Instead, the investigator has to use the physical evidence, witness testimony, or other information to piece together what is the most likely series of events

Rarely Catch the Person the Very First Time

taking money right out of the register or voiding sales leaving the investigator with his knowledge of the individual using fraudulent refunds to steal cash. The investigator now knows in absolute terms that the employee is lying by omission, and there is additional development of the admission to be done. In any interview where the individual confirms facts that were not related to him by the investigator, it helps substantiate that the subject is giving a truthful confession.

What Is the Common Denominator?

If there is a problem with the outcome of an interview or a conversation always seems to cause someone to deny, it is most likely going to happen because of something the interviewer is doing or saying that contributes to the problem. The common denominator in multiple interviews is the interviewer, not the subject. What this tells us is the interviewer’s statements or actions must be contributing to these difficulties. When investigators come to us saying, “I always have this problem,” the first thing we begin to do is look at what



the interviewer has done and said up to that event. By examining what came before the problem, we are often able to determine how to correct these difficulties. For many investigators, it’s the problem of developing an admission beyond what was already known from the investigation. With this problem, it’s often the assumptive question that contributes to the lack of development. For example, if an investigator watched an employee steal $20 out of the terminal and put it in the right front pocket, he may choose to ask the individual to remove the money from their pocket immediately. Now the employee knows he is caught but also can surmise that this is the only thing the investigator knows and thus is confident that he can claim that this $20 theft was the only time he had taken money. Had the investigator gone through with the interview and asked the individual, “When was the very first time you took money from the company? It wasn’t your first day on the job was it?” The investigator now has an opportunity to expand the scope of the admission and ultimately develop the admission to a more accurate amount. Most of the problems in the interview are caused by the interviewer. These problems can vary, but ultimately they are the responsibility of the interviewer. It could be the tone of voice, word usage, strategy, failure to rationalize, or any of a dozen other things the interviewer is doing wrong. If you’re having problems, examine carefully what you’re doing and saying that may be contributing to the problem.


For everyone, there will be a very first time that they have done something wrong or committed a crime. However, people tend to fall into patterns of behavior that they can rationalize and justify internally. Also, people become more careless and have less fear of being caught the more often they do something. The very first time a crime is committed, there is a significant emotional and physiological reaction to their fear of detection, but this diminishes as they have success in their crimes. There are likely to be other indicators that a person is likely to be involved in theft activity. Dissatisfaction, poor workmanship, and frequent absences can all be indications that someone is unhappy in their position and can therefore justify a criminal act. Even in a murder where a husband takes his wife’s life, there are likely to be other actions he took during the relationship that could have contributed to the ultimate death. It would be highly unusual for a spouse to kill their partner unless it was preceded by some form of verbal or physical abuse, infidelity, or some other event that was a precursor to the murder. Prior to the interview, consider what the individual has done and what other related types of incidents would be of a similar nature. For example, a residential burglar could also easily rationalize a simple theft, shoplifting, or other property crime because they are closely related and likely to provide items that could be converted into cash. We will continue our discussion of lessons from the room in our next column. LOSSPREVENTIONMEDIA.COM





oe, a would-be thief, couldn’t believe his luck. Here was a store willing to hand him a brand new state-of-the-art smartphone with no credit check and a few dollars down. And just two doors away was another retail store—this one advertising that it paid top dollar for smartphones. The criminal wheels in his mind turned. “Easiest money I’ll ever make,” he thought. But in the real-world version of this scenario—and it did happen—“Joe” was rebuffed when he tried to turn his rent-to-own cell phone into quick cash. Rent-A-Center had registered the phone’s unique identifiers on a blacklist of sorts, so the companion retailer knew not to process the transaction. This was phase one of a security strategy that Rent-A-Center’s asset protection team devised to protect its rented mobile devices. In short order, the device protection plan the department employed reduced losses by over 50 percent and saved Rent-A-Center millions of dollars.

The Rent-to-Own Model

The primary loss prevention challenge faced by Rent-A-Center is obvious—and

built in to its founding business model. Started as Mr. T’s TV Rental in the 1960s, the concept was the brainchild of Ernie Talley, who wanted to give hardworking customers who lacked cash and credit a way to rent merchandise with an option to own it. The company’s rent-to-own model gives people who lack cash and credit immediate access to top brands and products. “We’re not retail; we’re rent-to-own, so our transactions start Brian Peacock where most end,” explained Brian Peacock, CCIP, director of asset protection for Rent-A-Center’s US operations. “When you make your first weekly payment of $30, you can be walking out with a $2,000 TV with no credit check.” It’s a model where some measure of loss is clearly unavoidable—and where the ability to control the amount of loss is critical to business success. From its founding as Rent-A-Center (RAC) in 1986, the company has grown from sixteen stores to approximately 2,600 stores in the United States, Mexico,

Canada, and Puerto Rico; employs nearly 21,000 people; and is a leader in an industry that is nearing $7 billion annually. The company earned its reputation by helping people furnish their homes with rent-to-own furniture, appliances, and electronics, but has expanded into computers and mobile devices. It’s in this category that the company started to see problematic losses. “When we entered the mobile space, there was a much higher risk of transaction fraud, and the mobile category saw high losses,” said Peacock. Not every customer chooses to follow the rent-to-own agreement to its conclusion. Some individuals, for example, decide that they can’t afford it, and others decide they want to upgrade. These cases are no problem for RAC; customers simply bring the item back for a return or an exchange. However, in some cases, customers stop making payments, which typically sparks the company’s recovery process. “It depends on what state and what jurisdiction the transaction was in, but typically we would pursue it through our legal department,” explained Peacock. “So as long as we did our work on the front end, we could file against

Total Past Due Dollars During Roll-Out of DPP on Smartphones, 2015*

Remaining Value Dollars Past Due










30-59 Days Past Due






60 Days Past Due

*Graph lines reflect the drop in past-due dollars as more smartphones had device protection installed







PRODUCT PROTECTION the customer—for a felony in some jurisdictions—or pursue a civil case.” Although RAC was doing an effective job at recovery, the expense of getting products back from delinquent customers was significant, especially with its mobile category. “In our general model there is already risk, and we realized that we were going to have to figure out a new approach for smartphones, to prevent people from renting a phone and then selling it to an unsuspecting customer on Craigslist or eBay.”

An Idea Takes Shape

Rent-A-Center’s million-dollar device protection solution originated five years ago in the loss prevention department, which is now branded as asset protection. The LP team was mulling over ways it could protect its rent-to-own computers. One of the ideas was to secure computers with software that could be remotely activated, essentially rendering them “bricks.” The idea to apply a software solution to inventory hit a snag, however, when Aaron’s—using a similar product— was accused of accessing the cameras on customers’ computers. (Issues in the case are still being litigated. In May, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against retailer claims that insurance providers had a duty to defend it in underlying lawsuits.) The case drew quite a bit of attention in the press and caused RAC to rethink its plan to lock rental laptops. “We had put the idea on pause until we started with mobile and smartphones—at that point we knew we were going to have to figure something out to protect our assets,” said Peacock. Through leveraging his retail connections, Peacock turned to Recipero, a data aggregator focused on depriving thieves of a safe and ready market for misappropriated mobile devices. The company collects data from a variety of sources, such as theft reports, carrier contracts, and device ownership data, and shares that with law enforcement, insurers, and retailers—with the goal of helping stakeholders identify instances of fraud, for example in the event that a person sells his or her device and then files

Benefit denial is one of the core principles of a situational crime prevention approach to security, which is built on the theory that an effective way to deter crime is to make attempts more difficult, more risky, and less rewarding. The strategy’s potential to cut crime is clear—if goods aren’t useable or won’t work unless purchased, then there is no reason for someone to steal them. On the backend, RAC gets daily reports with information on which device, when, and where such attempts took place. Within twenty-four hours a notification is sent to operations so that a call can be placed to the customer that had possession of the device and make him or her aware that RAC had knowledge of the attempted transaction.

Old Strategy, New Twist

an insurance claim, or if a person is attempting to sell a leased device. By leveraging the power of blacklists under its Stop Loss program, Rent-A-Center was able to make an immediate impact on the losses due to fraudulent resale of rented mobile devices. “We got that initial strategy up and running quickly, and we immediately saw a positive impact,” said Peacock. That included the real-world case of “Joe.” When he took his just-rented smartphone to a neighboring GameStop, the device showed up on a “don’t purchase” list, and the retailer turned him away. Thwarted, he returned to the RAC store two doors away and returned the phone. LP MAGAZINE | JULY–AUGUST 2017

The idea of curtailing a crime by denying thieves the ability to benefit from the goods they steal is an old one. Recipero’s website highlights a quote from a book on crime reduction dating back to 1800—“Deprive a thief of a safe and ready market for his goods; and he is undone.” Benefit denial is one of the core principles of a situational crime prevention approach to security, which is built on the theory that an effective way to deter crime is to make attempts more difficult, more risky, and less rewarding. The strategy’s potential to cut crime is clear—if goods aren’t useable or won’t work unless purchased, then there is no reason for someone to steal them. For revenge or out of spite, perhaps, but that’s about it. The strategy has a history in loss prevention, such as the development in the 1980s of ink or dye tags to protect store apparel. In that use case, illicit removal was designed to ruin the garment, thus reducing the ability for a thief to use it or convert it to cash, according to Read Hayes, PhD, CPP, director of the Loss Prevention Research Council. More contemporary benefit-denial techniques include car stereos that don’t function if


PRODUCT PROTECTION the faceplate is removed and special hotel hangers with small hooks or ball tops that require special racks. “In this low-tech example, benefit denial does not make stealing hangers riskier or more difficult; rather it makes it less rewarding unless the thief steals the rack as well or sells the hangers to other hotels,” according to Hayes. While “benefit denial is not the total product protection answer for all assets in all places,” Hayes suggests that it is a good fit for today’s retailers, who are under pressure to enhance relationships with shoppers by providing open or self-serve merchandise access. “Benefit-denial technologies hold the promise of much more open selling of even high-value items,” according to Hayes. This concept—to deny the illicit use of smartphones—was at the foundation of Rent-A-Center’s winning asset protection strategy. Peacock and his team knew that the technology existed to lock cell phones and began to investigate how they could make it work for them. It was a thought exercise that the asset protection team was practiced at conducting. “We’re not the typical retailer, so the typical loss strategy won’t work for us in 80 to 90 percent of cases,” explained Peacock. “So we’re very used to thinking about how we can take an existing security solution and create a modified version that fits our business.” In the last few years, the RAC asset protection team has used its unique business model to drive a slate of innovative technology solutions, including use of remote CCTV and business analytics to conduct remote in-stock audits to boost sales. The AP team also has several new projects in development, including the use of ID scanning technology combined with feature-matching biometrics to create a digital identity for customers. These profiles will use multifactor authentication to assist with detecting internal and/or external fraud while approving or declining rent-to-own applications. While phone-locking technology already existed for corporate devices, the AP team had to do some legwork in order to find a technology partner who could provide technology that would


Percent of RAC Smartphone Deliveries to Stores with DPP Installed, 2015 Snapshot* 80%





63.14% 60%

53.17% 50%

40% 4/18





Percent with DPP *As it was critical to RAC’s ROI, metric was tracked weekly during launch

prevent phones from working even after a factory restore and resetting of the device. RAC’s new partner, an endpoint security company called Absolute, began working on the next step—development of the software local stores would install on each smartphone before it was rented. The whole asset protection project was implemented remarkably fast. In July 2014, RAC launched smartphones in all of its stores. In November, the asset protection team partnered with the largest smartphone data company to register the international mobile equipment identity (IMEI) numbers of all RAC smartphones to protect them from being sold or traded at other major retailers. In April 2015, the RAC asset protection team launched its Device Protection Program (DPP)—the technology-based solution to lock a device in the event it is lost, stolen, or has an expired contract.

Rollout and Results

Webinars for every store manager in the country, led by AP and supported by RAC’s mobile training group, was key to JULY–AUGUST 2017


a successful roll out of the DPP. Adoption was aided by the fact that the LP program opened up a lucrative product category many stores had shied away from. “They absolutely loved it and couldn’t wait to get it,” said Peacock. “Part of their bonus is based on store profitability, and stores were anxious to rent more smartphones.” Additionally, the asset protection team, in coordination with the sales and mobile training groups, created a resource manual for store personnel that walked them through the steps of the program, potential scenarios that could arise, and instructions for helping customers understand the program. The manual detailed specific instructions on issues, such as how to install the DPP software onto phones (using a micro USB provided to stores) and how to respond to customers who report that their phones are locked. Written scripts take staff through the correct way to interact with customers in a range of locked-phone scenarios, in the event someone bought a stolen phone or is past due on a payment, for example.



Rent-A-Center’s million-dollar device protection solution originated five years ago in the loss prevention department. The LP team was mulling over ways it could protect its rent-to-own computers. One of the ideas was to secure computers with software that could be remotely activated, essentially rendering them “bricks.” At the heart of the DPP is RAC’s ability to lock a phone once the software is installed on a smartphone and it is rented. Locking scenarios include: ■ I f a smartphone customer is seven-plus days late on his or her payment, AP receives a notice from internal reports and automatically locks the device. The individual is only able to make emergency calls and receive calls, and a message appears—“This phone has been disabled because the lease agreement has expired. Please contact or visit your Rent-A-Center store to arrange payment or return the device.” Once payment is received, the customer is provided an unlock code to regain

full use of their smartphone. “On the front end, we let customers know about the technology and that the phone will lock if they go seven days past due,” explained Peacock. “And we let them know that once a phone is paid out, we can remotely remove the software.” I f an RAC customer attempts to sell a smartphone to a retail partner, a notification is sent to AP, who then disables the phone until it is recovered or a district manager authorizes the phone to stay on rent. W hen a customer reports a lost or stolen phone to RAC, AP disables the phone until it is recovered. That capability—that RAC can use the LP MAGAZINE | JULY–AUGUST 2017

software to help retrieve a stolen device for customers—has been used as a selling point to customers. In this way, the locking software isn’t strictly viewed as a way to enforce payment. ■ W hen a store charges off a phone as “Skip/Stolen” or “Inventory Shortage,” AP disables the phone until it is recovered. Once underway, the team anxiously awaited results from the DPP. One area of concern, which didn’t materialize, was that locking phones would cause a significant increase in returns. Instead, when faced with a locked device, most customers simply paid up. “People can’t imagine living without their phones, and we had a dramatic increase in payments,” said Peacock. From a technical perspective, Peacock said the phone-locking process has been smooth. However, with 180,000 locks placed on smartphones last year, AP is working with the RAC IT team to automate additional aspects of the process. Perhaps the most important benefit, however, is the fact that most customers don’t put the locking software to the test. When a smartphone has the device protection application installed, it’s 50 percent less likely to go seven or more days


PRODUCT PROTECTION past due compared to devices without the program installed, RAC data show. The 50 percent reduction in past dues equated to a 50 percent reduction in losses for the company. When devices do go past due, more than 60 percent of customers either make a payment or return the device within seventy-two hours of being locked. Investigations have also benefited from the ability to pull the phone number from the SIM card within the device. This capability has assisted in the successful resolution of numerous internal and external investigations, according to Peacock, for example cross referencing a stolen phone’s number, identifying a suspect, and calling the number to conduct an impromptu interview.

Moving Forward

From deterring theft, reducing loss, and improving collections, RAC’s AP team calculated millions in savings within the first twelve months of the DPP. With those results, it’s no surprise that Peacock, who has spent twenty years in the loss prevention industry, called it “one of the most innovative and rewarding projects I’ve worked on.”


Remaining Value Protected by DPP

Percent Protected

Galaxy Note 2



Galaxy Note 3



Galaxy Note 4



Galaxy S 3



Galaxy S 4



Galaxy S 5



Galaxy S 6








Galaxy S Relay TOTALS

Peacock added that the endeavor was a true team effort, including key players in operations and product service, technical support, and the promotion and sales strategy divisions. RAC was also careful to work with



its vendor to develop technology that would have no ability to track devices, locate individuals, take screenshots, or do anything similar that might cause privacy concerns. “Our reach was limited to our goal to secure our



From deterring theft, reducing loss, and improving collections, RAC’s AP team calculated millions in savings within the first twelve months of the DPP. With those results, it’s no surprise that Peacock, who has spent twenty years in the loss prevention industry, called it “one of the most innovative and rewarding projects I’ve worked on.” assets until recovered or a payment is collected,” said Peacock. As for advice for his industry peers, Peacock said he’s seen the value of making things simple and had to know that after the first webinar introducing the DPP that the stores would get it and love it. “My new motto is if it needs instructions, then it is probably too difficult to execute,” said Peacock. Somewhat related, Peacock said the project taught him the benefit of taking responsibilities and pressures off stores

by creating an enterprise solution that transfers work load to a central office, in this case the RAC Field Support Center. “Our program had a high success rate because we did not depend on 2,400 store managers to identify devices that needed to be locked. We took care of that for them,” said Peacock. The Field Support Center also supplied a centralized tool to quickly provide information about locked phones, including the passcode needed to unlock devices, he added.

Peacock understands that the millions saved in year one is likely the program’s high watermark. As awareness grows among scofflaws and deadbeats, fewer are likely to rent phones with the intention to steal. But while savings from the DPP on smartphones levels out, the RAC asset protection team is already taking aim at its next target—laptop computers and tablets and, eventually, game systems and televisions. “The technology isn’t quite there yet, but the opportunity is definitely there,” said Peacock, anxiously looking forward to his AP team’s next million-dollar victory.

GARETT SEIVOLD is a journalist who has covered corporate security for nearly twenty years. He has been recognized for outstanding writing, investigative reporting, and instructional journalism. He has authored dozens of survey-based research reports and best-practice manuals on security-related topics. Seivold can be reached at GarettS@LPportal.com.

STOPPING BAD GUYS STARTS WITH GOOD DATA COMBATING CRIME IS COSTLY, BUT IMPROPERLY ASSESSING CRIME RISK CAN BE DEADLY. With data from CAP Index®, retailers can quickly and accurately identify crime risk levels for all stores across their brand and pinpoint those that are most at risk for violent crime. CAP’s crime risk intelligence enables retailers to reduce an array of crime and loss.

Learn how to OUTSMART CRIME® today. capindex.com 800-227-7475




Brick-and-Mortar Is Not Dead; Amazon Just Proved It


The Amazon Prime service has a fee associated with it but is very similar to a loyalty program. For a yearly fee, you get expedited shipping and access to content like music, videos, and books. All the benefits are tangible and easy to understand. When you think of loyalty programs, normally what comes to mind is airlines and hospitality. While airlines and hospitality seem to have the loyalty piece figured out, it’s far from being straightforward and often has a lot of confusing fine print. Amazon Prime, on the other hand, was designed to be simple: pay this fee every year, and—bam—you get benefits. Free two-day shipping, a better price in some circumstances, free content like videos, music, books, and magazines, and access to digital services are only some of the perks. Amazon Prime is more about the customer experience and the technology itself. While most will look back and say Amazon is a technology company, I would challenge you to think about how they use technology to enhance the customer’s experience.

What Amazon has done, and some retailers have failed to do, is figured out how to create a customer experience that is conducive to the evolution of technology, economic state, and the generational differences.

Amazon Go

Amazon Go, while technically still a pilot, is a small-footprint store with minimal customer detractors. This allows the customer experience to be quick and easy. It can be considered the next generation of self-checkout. While the Amazon Go concept is still in pilot, it draws attention to the fact that Amazon is always geared toward the customer experience or at least the presentation is. Amazon Go uses advanced technology to allow the customer to go into a store, pick up an item, and leave without ever interacting with a cashier or point-of-sale (POS) system by using a smartphone and sensors throughout the store. My point with Amazon Go is not whether it is a good or a bad idea. The simple fact is that Amazon is consistently willing to try to enhance the customer experience.

Today, customers are more educated than ever on product costs, sales, and quality. The Internet allows customers to be more educated than ever and to set the tone for the experience and their expectations. Don’t forget that the demographic of the world is changing, and there are more people from more generations than ever. So how does a retailer cater to everyone? While I certainly don’t have the exact answer, I want to throw out a few things that Amazon has done to continue to grow and thrive, regardless of their success, profitability, or longevity.


Meehan is the chief strategy officer and chief information security officer for CONTROLTEK. Previously he was director of technology and investigations with Bloomingdale’s, where he was responsible for physical security, investigations, systems, and data analytics. He currently serves as the chair of the Loss Prevention Research Council’s innovations working group. Prior to his 13-year tenure at Bloomingdale’s, he worked for Home Depot in loss prevention, and has had various technology, loss prevention, and operational roles at several other companies. He can be reached at tom.meehan@controltekusa.com.

Amazon Prime

rick-and-mortar didn’t die, and Amazon just confirmed it with its purchase of Whole Foods. Unless you live under a rock, you have seen the news related to Amazon’s purchase of Whole Foods for more than $13 billion. Over 90 percent of retail purchases are made in-store today. So why all the news of store closings and retailers that are underperforming? Have all the mergers and acquisitions over the years made some retailers too big to maintain their size, or have some retailers not evolved with the change in consumer behaviors? Could it be that customer expectations have changed rapidly in the last five years with technology? What role does the Internet play?


By Tom Meehan, CFI

Amazon Books

Amazon Books is a brick-and-mortar bookstore with a lot of extras. When you think of Amazon Books and you include Amazon Prime, it takes the best of both



worlds and combines them together. Amazon Books has a select number of products generally in the most popular categories and allows you to shop as you would in a regular bookstore or with your app. You can use your app to pay, or you can pay in a normal fashion. If you’re a Prime customer, you receive all the price and extra benefits of Prime while you’re in the store. Much like the Apple Store, Amazon Books stores are extremely modern from the lighting to the setup itself. While I only had an opportunity to go into two Amazon Books, the experience is fun and quick with fast and friendly service.

Whole Foods

Lastly, why would Amazon buy Whole Foods? For starters, Amazon has been working on same-day grocery delivery for some time. Delivering fresh groceries is much more challenging because they’re perishable and a lot more susceptible to damage in delivery. Amazon’s acquisition of Whole Foods, in my opinion, is about a logistics and supply chain—a bigger network of warehouses to get customers fresh food within four hours.



SINCE 1986

Retail Loss Prevention

At this point, if you’re asking yourself what this has to do with retail loss prevention, I hope I can tie it together. What Amazon has done, and some retailers have failed to do, is figured out how to create a customer experience that is conducive to the evolution of technology, economic state, and the generational differences. So the next time you think of tackling a loss prevention challenge like shrink, I would recommend taking a step back and taking those three considerations. For example, twenty-five years ago, if you had a problem in the store, your first inclination may be to lock it up or staff the store. What if you found ways to sell the product quicker, faster and better while increasing inventory visibility by utilizing RFID to pinpoint the problem? Another example could be working with real estate to determine risk. In the past, you would look at crime and other statistics. Today, you can use your advanced marketing model, customer shopping behaviors, and your dot-com data on orders. What about identifying a dishonest customer today? You could reverse your good marketing models to see the bad customers. Lastly, with EAS in the past, you would look at an AM or RF solution. Today, you can use an RFID solution to protect your product while enhancing your inventory to help fulfill online orders. My point here is not that Amazon is a danger but rather a company that should help raise the bar for all of us. Use all your data and resources. Always think of the customer experience first. Remember that more than 90 percent of people still shop in a store. Make their experience great, so it stays that way. Always think bigger.

We’re also pretty good at building custom KeyControl® programs that reduce overall operating costs.




OR CALL US AT 1-800-316-5397


LPM EXCELLENCE The LPM “Magpie” Awards offer a means to celebrate industry accomplishments on an ongoing basis, recognizing the loss prevention professionals, teams, solution providers, law enforcement partners, and others that demonstrate a stellar contribution to the profession. The ability to influence change is a product of drive, creativity, and

LPM “Magpie” Awards: Applauding Excellence

determination, but it also requires a unique ability to create a shared vision that others will understand, respect, support, and pursue. Each of the following recipients reflect that standard of excellence, representing the quality and spirit of leadership that makes a difference in our lives, our people, and our programs. Please join us in celebrating the accomplishments of our latest honorees.

Excellence in Leadership

Excellence in Partnerships

Excellence in Leadership

With almost forty years of experience, Gene Smith, LPC, has been a key leader in the industry as a loss prevention practitioner, an executive search consultant for the LP industry, and much more. In 2007, Smith became a charter member and president of the Loss Prevention Foundation (LPF), the international leader in educating and certifying retail loss prevention and asset protection professionals. “I consider my greatest accomplishment in loss prevention is helping to build LPF in such a manner that it is respected for its quality of content, rigor, and implementation by following high credentialing standards,” said Smith. Through his efforts, Smith has made countless contributions to the careers of retail loss prevention professionals individually and to the LP profession as a whole. In June at the 2017 NRF PROTECT conference, he was inducted into the National Retail Federation’s Loss Prevention Ring of Excellence. “To those looking to further their careers in loss prevention, I would recommend reading as much as you can about LP as well as the retail business, finding a good mentor, becoming a good mentor, and accepting the fact that it is your responsibility to educate and invest in yourself if you want to move forward in your career,” said Smith.

After starting her career with the finance and audit departments at Home Depot, Houston served as the on-site program manager for Home Depot working with Verisk Crime Analytics, where she provided customer service and managed the asset protection information system (APIS) and related datashares for the company. In 2013, Houston joined LPM Media Group, where she manages client relationships involving internal communication, awareness, and training campaigns. “When building business partnerships, I believe it’s most important to find common ground or interests,” said Houston. “It makes it easy to connect with someone when you start with that as a base and can grow the conversation from there.” However, she also believes that partnerships must be built upon a commitment to the relationship. “I’ve always looked for opportunities to network and build relationships with others. I’m a huge believer in the power of networking. Whether it’s taking on extra projects for a department or volunteering for a day on a Habitat for Humanity build, it’s good to get to know people both professionally and informally. Networking isn’t always about what you can get from the network. It’s even more powerful when you can use it to help others.”

Following international travel as an environmental consultant and then a corporate safety manager with Case Corporation, Lajeune was recruited to Sears as corporate safety and hazmat manager in 2003. As her retail career continued to flourish, she was named director of safety for Kmart in 2005, later expanding that role with Sears Holdings as director of corporate safety operations and then senior director of safety, food safety, and hazmat. Lajeune then joined the asset and profit protection team in 2014, has also picked up responsibilities over crisis management, and currently serves as format leader for retail asset and profit protection. With the diversity of her own background illustrating her message, Lajeune feels that leadership requires flexibility, vision, and the ability to bring out the best in the team as key contributors to her success. “We must be able to build on the potential of the team, but we also have to earn their trust,” said Lajeune. “We have to demonstrate both a willingness and ability to learn and grow ourselves while looking to bring it out in others. In order to rally behind your vision, the relationship with the team has to be genuine. Only then will they be willing to do what’s necessary for you, for themselves, and for the entire organization.”

Gene Smith, LPC, President, Loss Prevention Foundation

Katherine “Kat” Houston, LPQ, Director of Client Services, LPM Media Group

Nadine Lajeune, Format Leader, Retail Asset and Profit Protection, Sears Holdings

Nominations Are Encouraged at Excellence@LPportal.com We want this to be your program. Those of you working as LP practitioners witness these exceptional performances on a regular and ongoing basis, and we strongly encourage you to provide us with nominees for each of the award categories. We encourage creative nominations and want the program to cast a positive light on the many tremendous contributions of the loss prevention community. Nominations can be submitted via email to excellence@LPportal.com.










INTERVIEW EDITOR’S NOTE: David Johnston is senior director of loss prevention and corporate security at Dunkin’ Brands. Prior to his current position, he was director of business development with LP Innovations and XBR product manager for Datavantage. Johnston held multiple roles in loss prevention for J. Baker and Jordan Marsh. He also serves as president of the Restaurant Loss Prevention and Security Association. EDITOR: Let’s start at the beginning. When did you get started in loss prevention?

JOHNSTON: I started thirty years ago as a store detective and then an internal investigator for the Jordan Marsh Company in downtown Boston. I was attending college in Boston for criminal justice, so a position like this was an opportunity to gain experience while still in school. From there, I took the position of regional loss prevention manager for J. Baker, Inc., a diversified retailer of shoes, big and tall men’s clothing, and uniforms. It was during my role at J. Baker, that my career path changed. In 1998, Steven May, the SVP of loss prevention at the time, presented a plan to the CEO and board of J. Baker to flip the LP department into a profit center. This resulted in the creation of a new company, LP Innovations, under Steven May, who is still the current CEO of the company and a longtime friend and mentor of mine. With the forming of LP Innovations, we hit the ground running, supporting retailers who didn’t have a loss prevention department and those who needed supplemental resources. The challenge was that we, all LP professionals, needed to develop the business. We needed to learn to sell, market, and grow LP Innovations to retailers of all sizes, segments, and structure. That is where I began to learn about business, from selling the value of loss prevention to executives to developing programs for a variety of retailers. EDITOR: When did you move to Datavantage?

JOHNSTON: During my time with J. Baker, I became one of the first power users of the XBR exception-based reporting


(EBR) tool in our industry. I also developed LP Innovations’ EBR analysis group, becoming experts in the XBR tool for many of our customers. In 2002, I left LPI to become the XBR product manager, working with another mentor, Raoul Ricard, the creator of the XBR system. I was the XBR product



manager for four years. During that time, I had the opportunity to expand my business knowledge, understand product development, and most importantly learn how to work with cross-functional teams to support our customers utilizing the technology. It was a great experience to learn how technology is developed,



Dunkin’ Brands is the worldwide franchisor of two of the world’s most-recognized and beloved brands—Dunkin’ Donuts, which started in 1950 in Quincy, Massachusetts, and Baskin Robbins, which started in 1945 in Glendale, California. What I like best about our brands is that although they began on opposite coasts, everyone is passionate about our brands and they evoke powerful memories.

from customer need to development and through the entire implementation process. The role also provided me the opportunity to travel internationally and work with loss prevention departments in different countries. EDITOR: What happened next?

JOHNSTON: In 2006, I returned to LP Innovations. Throughout my career, I have always focused on continuing to develop myself and always seek to maintain positive relationships. I have been fortunate and thankful for those who have helped me to succeed. Paul Jones took a chance on a suburban teen as a store detective and introduced me to loss prevention at Jordan Marsh. Raoul Ricard taught me how to develop great customer relationships and to work with various business units for the greater good of the customer and the business. When Datavantage was purchased by Micros, things changed. In short, I found that I didn’t want to work for such a large company and sought to make a change. The timing was beneficial as Steven was taking LP Innovations private and looking to develop a deeper bench to help develop the business. So he recruited me back to LPI to develop the business development channel, working with sales and marketing and consulting. I have a long history with Steven and am grateful for all that he has done to develop me into a well-rounded business executive and loss prevention professional. Steven has always been a leader who helps you to develop. I recall one time that he made me approach our CFO at J. Baker to ask for budget and approval for an idea that I had presented. His approach was if you have an idea, you own the idea; you’re responsible for seeing it through. His approach allowed me to learn, develop new initiatives, fail on occasion, but learn from my mistakes. My experience at LPI was invaluable to my future career plans. EDITOR: So now, after sixteen years on the vendor side, you’ve returned to LP. When and why did you make that decision?

JOHNSTON: As a solution provider, it was important for me to stay engaged LP MAGAZINE | JULY–AUGUST 2017



Speaking with David Johnston is Amanda Marschilok, LP analytics manager (left), and Patrick Finnegan, senior manager of corporate LP (right).

Our core initiatives are focused on educating the independent franchise business owners on the importance of incorporating the concepts of loss prevention into their businesses. We educate them on understanding how losses affect sales, unit economics, and overall profitability. We show them systems, reports, and metrics that we think can help them better understand their businesses, and they then are positioned to take their own actions to reduce loss. with the practitioners and the practice of loss prevention. Although I was helping many companies through LPI, I missed developing my own team and program. When the position became available at Dunkin’ Brands, several practitioner friends of mine convinced me to apply, many saying that my approach and experience would be ideal for the position. Interestingly, after I applied, the director of recruiting called me and wasn’t sure if I was qualified for the position. She didn’t see any retailer or


restaurant company as my last three employers and didn’t know if I had the qualifications. When I described LPI and my experience, she asked me to come in for an interview. I am glad she called rather than cast my resume aside. Otherwise, we may not be speaking today. The final decision was difficult in saying goodbye once again to Steven and LPI, but as a good mentor and leader, Steven knew Dunkin’ Brands was a great fit for me. I was born and raised here in Massachusetts, so Dunkin’ is in my JULY–AUGUST 2017



blood. During the interview process I learned quickly how engaged everyone is here at Dunkin’ Brands, the history of the brands, an energizing environment, and the opportunity to develop a new approach to loss prevention in the company. EDITOR: Before we get into the LP side of Dunkin’ Brands, give us a little background on the company itself. continued on page 30


Restaurant Loss Prevention and Security Association Conference Scheduled for July 30–August 2 in Las Vegas EDITOR: In addition to your professional responsibilities, you are also the current president of the Restaurant Loss Prevention and Security Association (RLPSA). Tell us about that organization.

JOHNSTON: The RLPSA is an association specific to loss prevention, safety, and security professionals in the restaurant and food-service industry segment. This year is its thirty-eighth year, and although our segment has evolved, the RLPSA goal is to stay focused on member engagement, solution provider partnership, and solving restaurant and food-service issues. EDITOR: What is your role there as president?

JOHNSTON: The president leads the board of directors and supports the associations’ long-term strategic plan. Unlike some other associations, a board member serves for three years, and the president serves a one-year term. As president, the focus is to continue the progress made the previous year, bring forth new initiatives, and prepare the board members for the following year and eventual next president. The RLPSA has an executive director, who serves as the primary director of the association. We are fortunate to have Amber Bradley serving as our executive director for the past couple of years. EDITOR: Who are some of the other companies that are represented on the board?

JOHNSTON: We have some great leaders and very passionate people on our board. This year’s board includes Rocco Prate from Wendy’s who serves as vice president of the board, Michael Loox from BLD Brands, Van Carney from Dominos Pizza, Ken Gladney from Taco Bueno, Linda Zaziski from Little Caesars, along with Scott Elkins from UAS and Stephen Longo from CAP Index. We have great representation of different company structures, safety and LP expertise, and industry diversity on this year’s board. You may have also noticed that two of the board members are solution providers. The RLPSA, from its very beginning, has valued the relationship between practitioner and solution provider. The RLPSA has two positions on the board that are held and voted on by solution providers. The engagement of our solution providers within the RLPSA helps us as practitioners, and the involvement of business leaders on the board make us better. EDITOR: Other than the annual conference, what are other initiatives you are engaged with?

JOHNSTON: Last year we unveiled our long-term strategic plan, which included several initiatives to help us grow and evolve with our membership and our challenges. This plan includes enhancing current programs like our RLPSA Connect, a one-day regional workshop held twice a year to connect law

enforcement, members companies, and franchisees to discuss timely and regionally specific LP, safety, and security issues facing the restaurant industry. With our solution provider membership, we have continued to expand our webinar’s throughout the year, helping our membership learn of new offerings and technologies available to make us better. Some new initiatives this year include our improved website that now provides more resources and tools to assist our members. Developed by our members, these resources can assist in developing programs and procedures in various restaurant settings. We have also conducted several membership discussions, giving our membership the opportunity to share, discuss, and network with each other on several timely topics. Some of the topics this year have included mobile and digital fraud, smart safes, and protecting our locations against robberies. All of our initiatives are true to the RLPSA tagline—“Smarter. Together.” EDITOR: Your next annual conference takes place in July. Where is it and what does the agenda look like?

JOHNSTON: Our thirty-eighth annual conference will be in Las Vegas from July 30th through August 2nd. We’ve got a fantastic agenda planned. Amber, Rocco, and our planning committee have done a great job lining up fantastic speakers and timely topics. Our opening keynote speaker is Eric O’Neil, former FBI counterintelligence operative. The movie Breach was based on his work in taking down one of the most infamous US spies, an FBI agent providing intelligence to the Russians for more than twenty years. He will be discussing several topics including protecting your company against insider threats. We also have Shawn VanSlyke, former FBI behavioral analysis unit chief, who will be speaking on today’s changing violence landscape with homegrown violent extremists and understanding potential radicalization in the workplace. Another exciting speaker will be William Espy, brand visionary from Chipotle. He will be discussing the issues Chipotle has faced over the past year and how to handle brand and business in the event of a crisis. EDITOR: That’s power packed right there with those speakers.

JOHNSTON: Absolutely, but just as exciting as our great line-up of keynote speakers, the presentations we have from our membership looks to be even more engaging and educational. Our members continue to support the RLPSA through their willingness to share information and present their programs and initiatives to those attending the conference. We also have a great solution provider expo, with several new solution providers coming for the first time this year, and veteran solution providers who continue to support the RLPSA and our membership. [Learn more about the RLPSA conference on page 58.]



INTERVIEW continued from page 28

JOHNSTON: Dunkin’ Brands is the worldwide franchisor of two of the world’s most-recognized and beloved brands—Dunkin’ Donuts, which started in 1950 in Quincy, Massachusetts, and Baskin Robbins, which started in 1945 in Glendale, California. What I like best about our brands is that although they began on opposite coasts, everyone is passionate about our brands and they evoke powerful memories. Everyone has a story about the first time they enjoyed Dunkin’ donuts or Baskin Robbins ice cream. It makes working for our brands fun. Today there are more than 20,000 Dunkin’ Donuts and Baskin Robbins locations across more than sixty countries. We’re 100 percent franchised in the United States; we have no company-owned locations. We are also unlike many other franchised companies in that we don’t own our supply chain. EDITOR: Do you make recommendations on how franchisees might go about putting together an LP program?

JOHNSTON: As a franchisor, we do not direct, develop specific programs, or require certain measures of our franchisees. We recommend practices and common elements of an LP program, but specifically developing a program is up to each independent franchisee. That doesn’t mean the LP team doesn’t engage with our franchisees, because we certainly do. We just engage more from a consultative and business approach. Our core initiatives are focused on educating the independent franchise business owners on the importance of incorporating the concepts of loss prevention into their businesses. We educate them on understanding how losses affect sales, unit economics, and overall profitability. We show them systems, reports, and metrics that we think can help them better understand their businesses, and they then are positioned to take their own actions to reduce loss.


On the corporate security side, our biggest responsibility is Dunkin’ Brands’ roughly 1,100 employees, especially the safety and security of all employees while traveling to any of our locations across sixty-plus countries around the globe. Whether it is a member of leadership traveling to an area or an international business manager in-country, our employees are our brand, and we want to keep them safe. JULY–AUGUST 2017



INTERVIEW EDITOR: What responsibilities does your team have in loss prevention and security on the corporate side?

JOHNSTON: Our team is fully engaged in various aspects of our business, which is a testament to the people on the team and our ability to build relationships with other departments. The LP team focuses their time on our franchisee initiatives, understanding that the more profitable our franchisees are, the better it is for us as the franchisor. We also are responsible for investigating certain violations of our franchise agreements, including intentional underreporting of sales. We look for loss prevention managers who are business savvy, can understand financial documents, and can lead a sophisticated investigation. The team also has a role in investigating potential fraud regarding our e-commerce. On the corporate security side, our biggest responsibility is Dunkin’ Brands’ roughly 1,100 employees, especially the

safety and security of all employees while traveling to any of our locations across sixty-plus countries around the globe. Whether it is a member of leadership traveling to an area or an international business manager in-country, our employees are our brand, and we want to keep them safe. EDITOR: Do you use any support services to help with travel safety?

JOHNSTON: We are a small department here corporately, so we do utilize third-party services to support travel safety, in-country security, and medical support. The world is changing from a safety and security perspective. Locations like airports and markets and countries that were once considered safe are now primary targets for attacks. With such a large global footprint, employees can be anywhere across the world, visiting restaurants, new countries or cities for development, or coffee fields located in the mountains of third-world countries. Our travel-safety program

includes educating our employees on key principles to help them remain safe, providing information and alerts quickly to those traveling, and having services at the ready should we need to assist our travelers or those living abroad. It is a team effort with the traveler, our partners, and our corporate team focused on safety. We also participate in several government-sponsored information networks. Before coming to Dunkin’ Brands, I was aware of these networks but as a solution provider never engaged as a member. We are a member of the FBI’s Domestic Security Alliance Council (DSAC). We are also a member of the Overseas Security Advisory Council (OSAC) with the Department of State. These memberships, along with others, are very important when you need to protect US brands and employees across the world. I highly recommend US brands engage with these public-private networks. In today’s environment of terror, cyber, and violence, this

Let our patented Sherpa™ Tag guide your Yeti sales to PEAK PROFITS!

For More Information: (800) 466-4502 www.isscorpus.com LP MAGAZINE | JULY–AUGUST 2017



Our success has been the transition of the entire team into business professionals first, focusing on the concepts of loss prevention. I have a great team, people much smarter than I am, and everyone focused on how we can continue to make our franchisees more profitable—their success is our success. partnership has proven to be very beneficial to our efforts. EDITOR: What position do you report to at Dunkin’ Brands?

JOHNSTON: I report to the chief legal and human resource officer of our brand. I have a very supportive leader and executive team. They understand the value our team brings to both the brand and our franchise community. Without that, we would not be as successful as we have been in our efforts. EDITOR: How does the company measure your performance or effectiveness?

JOHNSTON: We measure our performance based on the metrics of the business. We don’t have employee theft, shoplifting, or shrink percentage to measure our value. Our team measures performance primarily based on our impact to comparable sales, weekly sales increase, and other metrics focused on restaurant and franchise network performance. To help educate leadership on the team’s value, we implemented a Quarterly Department Review or QDR, which is a business recap distributed to each brand’s leadership team and my supervisor, showing the team’s activities


and accomplishments. The value of this QDR is that it is presented using the company’s business metrics and calculating our financial impact to both the franchisees and the brand. Sharing these results has made us better business partners, increased our engagement with franchisees, and continue to show the value of our team. EDITOR: What types of things have you instituted when it comes to data technologies and analytics?

JOHNSTON: Over the past three years, our focus has been on increasing our analysis capabilities and presenting those opportunities to our franchisees. Our team’s success depends on our ability to educate franchisees on the importance of loss prevention. We need to market our initiatives to the independent franchise business owners. This is where my experience as a solution provider has been invaluable to my position here at Dunkin’ Brands. We are selling loss prevention every day. We are showing how business owners can be more profitable integrating loss prevention into their business cultures. From a technology standpoint, we have begun to utilize the tools being used by our business analytics team to help us improve how we test, analyze, JULY–AUGUST 2017



and present results. Using the same tools allow our results to have the same validity with leadership, with everyone speaking the same language and trusting the results. Our success has been the transition of the entire team into business professionals first, focusing on the concepts of loss prevention. I have a great team, people much smarter than I am, and everyone is focused on how we can continue to make our franchisees more profitable—their success is our success. EDITOR: You obviously have a great deal on your plate at work. How do you spend the time you manage to have away from your professional life?

JOHNSTON: My wife of twenty-five years and I enjoy spending time with our two teenage children. We do as much as we can as we know they grow quickly and will eventually be off leaving the house in a few short years. If I am not traveling, I can be found playing ice hockey two to three times a week and for the last sixteen months studying Krav Maga, which is the Israeli military self-defense fighting system. I am also an avid reader, always having a book or two nearby to read throughout the week.

As a member of The Loss Prevention Foundation, you join an association founded by and for loss prevention professionals. With access to an elite network of fellow industry professionals, development tools tailored specifically to our industry to help you advance your career and other great member benefits such as exclusive access to elite savings and discounts on thousands of products and services nationwide. Your membership is not only a demonstration of industry leadership; it’s a commitment to the profession and to your own professional development. Elevating the Industry, One Leader at a Time. For more information, visit losspreventionfoundation.org or call (866)433-5545

BENCHMARKING by Adrian Beck, Walter Palmer, and Colin Peacock

Adopting an Intervention Assessment Framework in LP


he recent benchmark report, Emerging Technology in Loss Prevention Retailing, reviewed the current use of nine technologies and the primary problems they are being used to address. While offering some useful insights on how the US loss prevention industry currently views these technologies, the development of the benchmark questions also raised issues about how different types of technologies and other interventions are selected for trial and use, the criteria chosen to measure their impact, and ultimately, how they are evaluated to understand their impact and return on investment. A visit to any of the annual loss prevention conferences will reveal an exhibition hall packed with vendors and technology suppliers offering a plethora of interventions designed to provide solutions to the myriad of retail loss problems faced by those attending the event. Most exhibitors naturally claim their interventions work and will prove to be excellent investments, with a number providing some form of evidence that it has already been proven successful. For the loss prevention executive, the challenge can be daunting, not least in terms of finding verifiable independent information on whether the claims being made stand up to any form of scrutiny and that the interventions will be applicable to their particular environments.

Developing a Clear Sense of Purpose

Risk Amplification: Making Offenders Think Twice, a recent study by Adrian Beck undertaken for the ECR Community Shrinkage and On-shelf Availability Group in Europe, reviewed the available published literature from the past forty years on a wide range of interventions intended to control theft in retail stores (for example, EAS, CCTV, signage and stickers, store design and layout, shelf-edge technologies, and the role of store and security staff). It found there were very few reliable studies in the public domain to help loss prevention practitioners draw clear conclusions about what interventions worked and under what circumstances. Most studies were either very dated and/or used methodologies that seriously undermined the efficacy of the findings being presented. The study did recognize, however, that it was only based on what was publicly available, primarily published in academic journals and books, and that numerous




Beck is a professor in the criminality department of the University of Leicester in the UK where he is primarily focused on research on retail crime and shrinkage issues. He can be reached at bna@le.ac.uk. Palmer is CEO/president of PCG Solutions, a loss prevention consulting, training, and education firm. He can be reached at wpalmer@pcgsolutions.com. Peacock is a visiting fellow at the University of Leicester and strategic coordinator for both the ECR Europe Shrinkage and On-shelf Availability Group and the Retail Industry Leaders Association Asset Protection Leaders Council in the US. He can be reached at colinpeacock@hotmail.co.uk. All are frequent contributors to both LP Magazine US and European editions.

unpublished company-specific cases may well exist that contradict the conclusions drawn in the report. The findings of the study do raise key questions about how loss prevention executives should go about selecting new interventions to be introduced into their businesses—what methodology should be adopted to ensure they are actually addressing the needs of the business and that performance measures have been clearly articulated. This may seem obvious, but when it comes to significant investments such as CCTV, is it always clearly articulated exactly what it is supposed to achieve,

Taken together, the intervention assessment framework can be used to create a more systematic and considered approach to the selection, review, and use of new interventions aimed at helping to manage retail losses. It offers a way to inject greater rigor into the approach, to enable practitioners to think through the specific context within which an intervention will operate and whether its application is suitable for a given environment. LOSSPREVENTIONMEDIA.COM

how it will deliver its intended purpose, and how its impact will be measured? Too often the language can be very loose and vague—“CCTV is being introduced to reduce crime and make staff feel safer.” What sorts of crime will it reduce and how will it do this—will the cameras leap from the ceiling and apprehend shoplifters? How will it make staff feel safer—will the display monitors intervene when a shopper becomes violent? How will its impact be measured—a reduction in crime? Measured how—through changes in rates of shrinkage or numbers of shoplifters reported to the police? Vague plans and unclear key performance indicators (KPIs) can seriously undermine not only confidence in the technology itself but also the judgement and integrity of those making the case for investment. Developing a clear sense of the purpose of the intervention, the necessary context within which it will operate, the way in which it will work (its mechanisms), and the measurable outcomes that will flow from its use are key questions to consider before deciding on any potential investment. This is particularly the case when it comes to emerging and future technologies where the developers may be both new to the world of loss prevention and still formulating the potential impact their interventions may deliver. For example, there is much current discussion and hype around developments such as drones, robotics, and feature-recognition technologies, and how they may be used within the realm of loss prevention. While a philosophy of “let’s see what happens when we use it” can be appealing in some circumstances, the challenging questions of what they will actually do and how they will make a measurable

difference remain key to securing their future use or not in the retail space.

Intervention Assessment Framework (IAF)

When considering a given intervention, it is important to consider the following four factors: 1. Purpose. What is the overall goal of the intervention? What is it supposed to do for the business? 2. Context. What needs to be in place in order for the intervention to deliver its impact mechanisms? 3. Impact Mechanisms. In what ways will the intervention actually work in order to meet its stated purpose? 4. Intervention Outcomes. How will the impact of the intervention be realized? It is perhaps worthwhile considering an example of how this would work for one of the interventions identified by the benchmark research on emerging technologies—smart shelves. In the example on page 36, the purpose of the intervention is to provide greater awareness of when products are removed from a shelf or display. Typically, this type of intervention is used for high-value items or those considered to be at risk of sweep thefts (high-volume stealing). The specific context of the operation of the intervention is potentially threefold. First, sales staff and/or security staff are alerted (via some form of communication device such as a smartphone or pager) when a product is removed or an unusual quantity of products are removed from a shelf or display (indicating a potential sweep theft), offering them the opportunity to approach the customer to offer help with their product selection



Sample Intervention Assessment Framework Intervention

Smart Shelves


The ability to detect the removal of product from specific shelves or displays based on defined criteria.


Impact Mechanisms

Members of sales staff or security guards alerted in real time when items are removed from shelf/display.

Staff able to approach potential thieves and increase perceived sense of risk of apprehension.

Losses reduced because offenders less likely to steal protected items due to presence of staff member.

Video recording triggered of the person removing items from a shelf/display.

Help to provide evidentiary data on identification of shop thieves.

Losses reduced because more offenders are prosecuted and banned from entering stores and so deterred.

Members of sales staff or security guards alerted in real time when an unusual number of items are removed from shelf/display.

Staff are made aware of when the shelf/display is empty to better avoid out of stocks.

Losses from other unprotected products increase as offending is displaced by the intervention.

Video recording triggered of the person removing an unusual number of items from a shelf/display.

Lost profits from out of stocks reduced as fewer items are leaving the store without being recorded, improving stock file accuracy.

Alert triggered when there are no items remaining on the shelf/display.

Lost profits from out of stocks reduced as staff are made aware more quickly of empty shelves/displays.

and payment. For the genuine customer, this can be perceived as attentive service, while for the prospective thief, this level of attention would normally lead to them being deterred from carrying out their intended criminality. Secondly, the smart shelf could trigger video recording of the person(s) removing the items. Thirdly, the smart-shelf activation could send an alert when the last product has been removed from the shelf or display, highlighting an out-of-stock situation. In terms of the impact mechanisms these contexts trigger, staff responding to the alerts and making themselves present and visible will increase the probability that would-be thieves are more likely to be deterred. (Research has shown that thieves themselves regard attentive staff to be highly effective.) By recording the instance when the products are removed from the shelf, the retailer is increasing the chances of identifying persistent or known thieves and increasing the likelihood of having more evidence to prosecute them in the future. Finally, by alerting staff when the shelf or display is empty, the intervention is increasing the likelihood that out-of-stock situations and the subsequent loss of sales is minimized. The final component of the framework requires that the intervention outcomes are identified. In this example, five have been suggested—four positive and one negative. In terms of positive measures, retail losses (probably measured through SKU-specific shrinkage numbers) should be reduced as more would-be thieves are deterred. They should also be reduced because more thieves are prosecuted and banned from entering the store through the greater availability of CCTV evidence. Lost profits from out of stocks should also be reduced by having greater inventory accuracy because fewer items are leaving the store without being recorded and by ensuring fewer out-of-stock events go unnoticed by store staff. However, there could also be a negative impact of


Intervention Outcomes



the intervention—would-be thieves could be displaced to other products in the store that are not protected by the intervention.

Generating Greater Rigor in the Use of Interventions

Taken together, the intervention assessment framework can be used to create a more systematic and considered approach to the selection, review, and use of new interventions aimed at helping to manage retail losses. It offers a way to inject greater rigor into the approach, to enable practitioners to think through the specific context within which an intervention will operate and whether its application is suitable for a given environment. For instance, in the example above, if staffing levels preclude employees from responding in a timely fashion to alerts, then the associated mechanisms and outcomes will not be achievable. Equally, if the current CCTV system cannot be used to generate evidentiary quality output, this will also undermine the capability of the intervention to deliver the desired outcomes. Finally, the framework offers a way to provide clearer synergy between the intended outcomes (in the case of many loss prevention interventions, lower levels of losses) and the way in which they will be achieved. Too often in the past, technological interventions in particular have been introduced without any clear sense of how they are actually supposed to work in a given retail context. And with the advent of yet more emerging and future technologies, it is now even more important to think through not only what they are intended to achieve but also how they will go about doing it.

Recommended Reading

For more information about some of these factors, check out Realistic Evaluation by Ray Pawson and Nicholas Tilley (1997, Sage Publishing).



LP LEADERS OF THE FUTURE? NO BIG BRAIN REQUIRED By Francis D’Addario, Dean Correia, and Sean Dettloff © 2017 Security Executive Council



he authors had the privilege of working for a relatively small “blue ocean” beverage company called Starbucks Coffee in the nineties. A key strategic question often posed by then CEO and Chairman of the Board Howard Schultz was, “How do you get big but stay small?” Starbucks then was the darling of retail having compounded consecutive incremental annual sales and revenue growth that proved generational. In 2017 the company reported that original investors have seen 18,000 percent in shareholder returns from the first public offering of twenty-five years ago. Schultz often demurred that he was “no big brain” when others credited him solely for Starbucks’ successes. Instead, he typically credited passionate cross-functional team play. Insiders often observed that the operating partnership of Howard Schultz (visionary), Howard Behar (operations), and Orin Smith (finance) was the magic elixir of Starbucks’ success. “H2O” became the shorthand reference for that high-performance leadership team aligned by values, vision, and mission. Those of us inside Starbucks who grew up in loss prevention were challenged to provide our brand additional all-hazards risk resilience. We evolved to better understand the changing cross-functional, enterprise-wide requirements for risk resilience as well as operational excellence. It was not by accident that Starbucks partners (the internal term for employees) and contracted solution providers transformed a small loss prevention department into a global asset protection organization. It was a stakeholder imperative. The protection portfolio expanded from retail loss prevention to include food manufacturing, information, employee, special events, and supply-chain protection programs to meet 20 percent per year growth. By 2007 the AP organization was forecasting net contribution (gross profit contribution over global expense) in the range of $26 million per year.


The AP services grew organically leveraging subject-matter risk experts and retail operational talent. Like many others in the retail security world of that time, we were schooled by the catastrophes that included the 9/11 terrorist attacks and subsequent anthrax attacks, the Boxing Day Tsunami that killed hundreds of thousands along the Indian Ocean, Hurricane Katrina and the aftermath along the Gulf of Mexico, the Nisqually earthquake in the Northwest US region, and several workplace homicides that took the lives of Starbucks partners. Add to these a couple of multimillion-dollar internal breaches that were sufficiently mitigated to preclude material loss. All these critical events were gut-wrenching. All were relatively predictable. Insiders committed some directly under the nose of the AP organization. All prompted incremental protection-in-depth improvements. Most were leveraged for service growth, culturally aligned with value priorities

beginning with people protection and ending with profit assurance. The post-event learnings spurred innovation, protection investment, stakeholder engagement, and measured-risk outcome improvements, paving the way for the persuasive net-contribution story. There were a few small failures along the way, including introduction of network-capable security systems in a dial-up environment. That required a next-generation innovation improvement for ongoing return on investment. Despite momentary setbacks, the AP organization learned from the shortfalls to stay on a path for continuous improvement. The approach today has matured. As faculty members of the Security Executive Council (SEC), the authors are now well-instructed by other all-hazard risk-mitigation programs plus fifteen years of SEC research, including strategic operational proven practices in twenty-six vertical business sectors. Contributing to the research results are SEC board members, C-suite executives,

People and assets, both physical and logical, require care and protection whether at rest or travelling through trusted networks. Persistent integrity assurance will likely become a service-level agreement objective of the future for many.





and distributed subject-matter experts who collaboratively evaluate and revise the all-hazards risk-mitigation and resilience value propositions.

Why Risk Resilience and Why Now?

Several trends are converging to influence future protection opportunities. Businesses are continuing to grow and becoming increasingly competitive even in relatively hostile markets where they are soft targets. According to a recent BusinessWire report titled Overview & Evolution of the Global Retail Industry, “The global retail sector is estimated to have achieved revenues of US$22.6 trillion in 2015 and should continue to rise to US$28 trillion by 2019.” Associate, customer, and partner care is key to brand reputation growth

and stickiness. Pollsters learned early on that engagement and loyalty scores relevantly depend on whether the stakeholder believes that management cares for them. As brands in all business sectors are reexamining their business-risk appetites against evolving compliance requirements, costs, market conditions, and mitigation capabilities, customer-care perception remains the prize. Stakeholders, goods, information, services, and supply chains require in-depth protection strategies from corporate headquarters to the farthest reach of the brand. People and assets, both physical and logical, require care and protection whether at rest or travelling through trusted networks. Persistent integrity assurance will likely become a service-level agreement objective of the future for many. LP MAGAZINE | JULY–AUGUST 2017

In the interim most business operators will continue to seek cost optimization if not operational excellence. Protection-in-depth may be a crawl, walk, run process within a more mature operational excellence framework. Reactive risk mitigation will give way to proactively designed risk-intelligence capabilities. Loss prevention and asset protection professionals can anticipate persistent questions regarding protection-service offerings and their related operational value propositions. The good news is that there are several fast-forming paths for continuous improvement to all-hazard risk resilience that will incrementally contribute to brand equity. What does good look like from an operational all-hazards planning perspective? The SEC has


LP LEADERS OF THE FUTURE? found some common denominator considerations. These may serve as a starting point for protection-in-depth consolidation, expansion, governance, or organization of future rebranding (see Global All-Hazard Risk Continuum Considerations chart on page 39). Brand Growth and Supply-Chain Extensions Face Increasing Global Physical, Logical, and Natural Risks The World Economic Forum and others have made the persuasive business case that man-made and natural risks are linked and impose substantial risk to global business. The pace of global change promises both fast-forming opportunities and risks for retail. Preparedness for all-hazard conditions will be required to win hearts and minds. Based on current SEC research, researchers observe that most major

View the World Economic Risk Forum video at weforum.org/agenda/2017/01/ these-are-the-most-likely-global-risks-2017.

brands will legitimately need and want more from loss prevention executives and their risk-mitigation peers in the future to meet the enterprise’s strategic objectives. All signs point to continued uncertainty and the need to be more prepared. LP’s ability to anticipate, report, respond, and mitigate with improved speed of service and better outcomes is timely for the business value case that likely will play competitively in a higher-risk global environment.

Loss prevention and asset protection professionals can anticipate persistent questions regarding protection-service offerings and their related operational value propositions. The good news is that there are several fast-forming paths for continuous improvement to all-hazard risk resilience that will incrementally contribute to brand equity.

Sam Ward (left), director of intelligence for TorchStone, picks up the finer points of an intelligence-led GSOC from Jeremy Rodrigues, senior manager of the Global Security Operations Center at The Boeing Company.





Risk Perceptions Continue to Drive Enterprise-Wide, Board-Level Risk Compliance Confidence and Organizations of the Future That Can Meet or Exceed All-Hazard Unified Risk Oversight Expectations Board members and C-suite officers find the Unified Risk Oversight illustration depicted on page 41 particularly helpful for conceiving a leadership framework for risk resilience. Brand protection-in-depth depends on cross-functional risk mitigation to contain the diverse hazards represented by the red attackers. Environmental, physical, and logical hazards are pervasive. Executive risk-communication recipients are represented in the green overarching superstructure. Unified communications processes at mid-level aggregate individual contributor and departmental data drawn from the cross-functional departments represented by the blue pillars. Aggregated acumen, tools, and strategic solution partners are leveraged for situational risk intelligence that informs critical-incident decision-making and governance. Next-Generation Solutions and Talent Will Require Innovation Change Management Rigor and Governance Regional and global risk and security operations centers (GROCs and GSOCs, respectively) now supervise enterprise-wide operational core process dependencies, including access control, alarms, cameras, cold chain, critical facility systems, communications, first-responder dispatch, and risk intelligence from network hygiene to anomalous hazard conditions for critical facilities, people, and supply chains. Integration is often arduous and sometimes haphazard, but proven practice documentation is underway, including Global Security Operations Centers as a contracted service. Privacy and security/safety interests will wax and wane with public safety and institutional security confidence. Nevertheless, risk-mitigation monitoring capabilities ought to


s Cu

Unified Risk Oversight Model


om it C

s er

d Au Bu an

s nit sU

M ve uti


e tte mi


ec Ex

ag em t








ire fD


Benchmarking the Next Generation of LP Professionals


rim erc

b Cy

s es sin n Bu ruptio dis

e nc














e ine



n le


lo ct



P , ns tio ism rup ctiv is ain r d , or a o ch b ly La tests pp n Su ruptio pro dis

ed lish r ts tab fo es e ef e le s Ro ver o to

Social Responsibility


Shareholder Relations

Risk Management



etak d y s lve ke vo All ers in old

ck o





ov ern



Br an



t lo



riz ed





Fra u


Fa il












The Security Executive Council MAGAZINE (SEC) is a leading research and advisory firm SECURITY focused on 2020 Identifying the corporate security Store of the Future risk-mitigation solutions. The SEC began to recognize unprecedented changes and opportunities in all-hazards operational risk management in 2010, when they took an initial look at a 2020 all-hazard risk-resilience strategy (see “Security 2020—Identifying the Store of the Future,” January–February 2011). Amidst unprecedented global business risk and rapidly changing retail and corporate climates, identifying professional leadership opportunities for evolving to meet new loss prevention and security demands is the subject of this article as well as ongoing SEC research. To assist in this research, the SEC wants readers of LP Magazine at all levels of the organization to participate in a benchmarking study to develop a next-generation leadership baseline to facilitate industry dialogue. The authors encourage loss prevention and asset protection professionals, other risk managers, and contracted solutions providers to complete the SEC’s survey “LP in Transformation—What Is the Next Generation of You?” Results will be shared in a future article in this magazine. To access the survey, visit securityexecutivecouncil.com/ lpsec2017.

January – February 2011 | LPportal.com | V10.1








e ive etit


f lo

Copyright 2011 Security Executive Council Unified Risk Oversight Model



orm Inf



Ac c rep oun or t ting ing & co rru




vir En

s los

s ilitie sib ed on fin sp de Re arly cle





c du

a pli




Information Security



Human Resources



isk ts h r en Hig ignmel s as trav d n a

la gu





Government Affairs

tur al


Crisis Management

fa wa re

Environ. Health & Safety

ck o




Corporate Security




Business Conduct & Ethics


Te c La




h tal






ar t

yv ett















rat io




LPM 0111-1.indd 1

reasonably advance, qualified by guardrail compliance including institutional acceptable-use and conduct governance, statutory laws, regulations, and international treaties. The industry will anticipate, pilot, test, improve, and proof innovations at a greater pace, including artificial intelligence and analytical capability extensions related to autonomous vehicles, drones, robotics, and smarter peripherals, such as image and audio authenticators to assist situational risk-intelligence officers for 24/7/365 hazard detection globally. Informed by corroborated social media and other intelligence inputs, physical and logical breaches will be detected in near real time. Collaborative integration of old knowledge and new knowledge—including analytics, intelligence, network, and systems administrators—will supplement better educated, equipped, paid, and trained first responders, critical-incident managers, and forensic investigators who can mitigate diverse risk situations for cost and loss avoidance or prosecutorial accountability. Diverse multigenerational talent will be required. Due to the well-publicized, ever-present risks and

threats of today and tomorrow, this continuous monitoring and response to all-hazards risks to brands is what employees, customers, and all stakeholders will come to expect. FRANCIS D’ADDARIO, CPP, CFE, is emeritus faculty, strategic influence and innovation for the Security Executive Council. An expert in all-hazards security risk and mitigation, he held executive loss prevention roles for Starbucks Coffee, Hardees, and Jerrico Inc. He can be reached at fdaddario@secleader.com. DEAN CORREIA, CPP, PI, is emeritus faculty for the Security Executive Council. He has had a career in operations and loss prevention in Canada spanning more than twenty years, holding senior leadership roles with global brands GAP, Starbucks Coffee, and Walmart. He can be reached at dcorreia@secleader.com. SEAN DETTLOFF, CPP, CFE, PI, is emeritus faculty for the Security Executive Council. He held senior leadership roles in retail operations, loss prevention, supply chain, and global corporate security with Amazon.com and Starbucks Coffee. He can be reached at sdettloff@secleader.com. LP MAGAZINE | JULY–AUGUST 2017



1/28/11 12:58 PM



Sponsored Editorial

Interview with Ken Kuehler

Solving Access­-Control Challenges by Engaging with Retailers What is your company’s role in the loss prevention industry? Detex Corporation is a US-based manufacturer that is focused on creating best-in-class life-safety and security-door hardware products that either facilitate or prevent individuals from entering or exiting buildings and other types of secured areas while meeting all applicable building codes. Our products are commonly used by retailers to help prevent shoplifting by helping control how customers exit stores, to help deter internal theft at receiving back-room doors, and to help prevent burglaries when stores or distribution centers are closed. However, our main objective is to listen to our end users and to use that input to provide them with products that solve their unique needs.

How do you engage with LP and risk management professionals? Although Detex does not sell products directly to retail and restaurant customers, we always want to encourage discussions with end users who want our assistance with a challenging application. If they want to discuss a theory of how their door should operate, or research life-safety codes, or recommend the best product choice, we’re always available to listen. We have an experienced team of experts who listen to customers’ challenges, ask a series of relevant questions, and then suggest the best product selection for the application. There are usually multiple solutions for a given situation, and our experts explain the different aspects of each idea. Listening to the customer often provides us with the next new product idea. In fact, many new products and improvements have resulted from

We have an experienced team of experts who listen to customer’s challenges, ask a series of relevant questions, and then suggest the best product selection for the application. There are usually multiple solutions for a given situation, and our experts explain the different aspects of each idea. 42



Kuehler began his career in retail loss prevention with Reebok before moving to Detex eighteen years ago where he has held positions of national account manager, marketing manager, and director of marketing and sales. Kuehler earned a bachelor of science degree in criminal justice from Texas State University and lives in Central Texas near Detex headquarters in New Braunfels. Kuehler can be reached at kk@detex.com.

discussions with end users and installing technicians. The best thing we can do—even with our years of expertise—is to listen to the customer.

Give us some examples of this approach to solving access control problems. We believe by working with end users, we can add extra value beyond simply providing hardware. That “extra value” might include features and options that minimize risk, or possibly allow for integration with a customer’s existing security system. Access-control applications can be quite complex as solutions can encompass optical turnstiles for a corporate office lobby, door-prop and exit alarms, as well as tailgate detection systems. For example, a door-prop alarm’s typical function is to cause a door to be closed, but it may also signal a camera system and capture an alarm event, which can help prevent a future lockdown issue. Tailgate detection systems and optical turnstiles help ensure that, with every valid access control event, only one person enters the secure area of a corporate office or distribution center. Integrating a door-prop alarm with an exit alarm can ensure that doors are locked and secure unless a manager is nearby, supervising a specific task at an unsecure door.

If you don’t sell direct to retailers, how do you market your products? Detex relies on qualified suppliers to stock, install, and service our products. Together we strive to supply, service, and care for retail and restaurant customers. We realize that we can’t be the best at everything, so we focus on designing and manufacturing products that meet the durability and performance requirements of our customers. We choose qualified distribution partners who can supply and install Detex products, as well as other common life-safety and security-door hardware products. Our distribution partners offer a total life-safety and security-door hardware package in which our products figure prominently.

How does an end user access your expertise? End users can reach out to the Detex team in several different ways. They can call 800-729-3829 option 2 to speak to someone. They can email questions and photos to support@detex.com. Or they can text questions and photos to 830-481-6433. Our team is available Monday through Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. central time. We also have experts at two dozen satellite offices across the globe. A complete listing of offices is available on our website at detex.com/contact/tech-support.



Winning Loss Prevention W

by Read Hayes, PhD, CPP Dr. Hayes is director of the Loss Prevention Research Council and coordinator of the Loss Prevention Research Team at the University of Florida. He can be reached at 321-303-6193 or via email at rhayes@lpresearch.org. © 2017 Loss Prevention Research Council

e always want to win, not just execute. In fact, we must win. When LP loses, life safety, brand image, and financial performance are all at risk. At the Loss Prevention Research Council (LPRC) and University of Florida (UF), that’s our mandate, to support LP/AP success through process and people improvement. We’re retailer-driven, and our teams are working with dozens of leading retail chain leaders to align LP focus on building winning capabilities to fully support their total retail enterprises. If an offender perceives there is no doubt his contemplated crime will be unsuccessful, then and only then will we deter him. If we deter a single or most offenders, we win. If an associate knows why and how to execute his or her job in a well-designed process and has the needed tools, then we reduce errors and omissions. Again, we win. If LP/AP efforts make a retailer more successful, key merchandise gets to and stays where the customer can conveniently buy it, and she feels safe while doing so, that is a very capable LP program, and that is the program we’re all striving to build. We’re doing this together via real-world innovation chains; ongoing, collaborative working groups; monthly webinars; the online Knowledge Center; and the annual Impact Conference.

You don’t get answers to questions you don’t ask. And you get useless or even catastrophic answers when you ask the wrong questions.

Many of us are always looking for answers without realizing we aren’t asking enough questions or maybe even the wrong questions. George Washington University Professor Michael Marquardt’s research indicates most leaders succeed because they frequently ask the right questions. In 2014, Marquardt wrote, “Good leaders ask many questions. Great leaders ask the great questions. And great questions can help you become a great leader.” Think about what you want to know and how you will use the information. In an excellent Inc. magazine article in 2016, Mirasee CEO Danny Iny pointed out when it comes to getting answers, the quality of your questions matter. You don’t get answers to questions you don’t ask. And you get useless or even catastrophic answers when you ask the wrong questions. JULY–AUGUST 2017

Wrong Question: How do I prevent this growing problem? Right Question: How can I build a more capable LP/AP program to better prevent problems? Carefully define your goals, so you don’t ask the wrong questions. Strive to ask questions about the ultimate outcomes you want. So instead of asking, “Will this action create a good result today?” you should be asking, “Will this effort get us to where we want to be in three to five years?” Wrong Question: How do I deal with this problem? Right Question: What’s the opportunity here to address and prevent this and future issues? Try not to get totally caught up in a surging problem where you don’t see anything else but that problem. We can become consumed with questions about how to solve this one problem. We do need to solve our new issue, but we should also be asking questions to put together a more capable preventive process and team. Mr. Iny believes the better questions to ask are about what you can learn and what opportunities you may be missing. Wrong Question: Should I do A or B? Right Questions: Can I do both A and B? Or should I do C? Or what other options do I have?

Winning Often Means Asking the Right Questions


Below are commonly asked wrong questions and what you should consider asking instead.


Asking “should I do A or B” may be creating an artificial choice. This scenario suggests A and B are mutually exclusive, and you can’t have them both. It also implies there aren’t other options. Keep thinking and brainstorming with others. There are good questions to ask that lead to better options and ideas. Try not to rush it; think of good questions. The take home: ask the right questions to get the right answers.

Featured LPRC Study

Two US retail chains participated in an extensive study of how to select individuals most likely to win as in-store loss prevention specialists (store detectives or “SDs”). The report is based on a very rigorous job domain and performance analysis process and should also provide practical input for retailers. Following are some of the highlights of this study.


continued on page 46

Connect With Your Crew Let your audience choose their preferred platform to increase awareness and participation. Offer engaging e-learning and communication tools to inspire exploration and growth. Feature built-in feedback applications to obtain their creative input. At LPM Media Group, our mobile and digital solutions move meaningful connections from possibility to reality.

Online Learning Management

Mobile Awareness Solutions Digital Magazines

Digital Signage

Custom Animation & Video

#connectwithyourcrew | www.LPMmediagroup.com

continued from page 44

Specialist versus Generalist. Store-level LP people have traditionally focused on customer theft control. Some retailers have all or just select in-store detectives conduct general duties as well as tracking and mapping store incidents and problems for analysis, training in-store LP staff, auditing LP efforts, and apprehending high-impact offenders. Many retailers also use store detectives to provide “bench strength” for promoting investigators, trainers, and supervisors. Each of these SD types is slightly different in mission focus and therefore in requisite knowledge, skills, abilities, and other characteristics needed to successfully handle the position. Sample Size. Two-hundred-one store detectives were administered a test of their G factor (or cognitive ability), a personality inventory known as the NEO PI-R, and a sheet listing their age, gender, years of education, years of LP experience, and so forth. Their scores and biodata were entered into a computer and statistically analyzed with various job performance scores provided by their immediate supervisors. Distinctive Characteristics. As hypothesized, there were generally different characteristics that were predictive of job performance scores for each of three types of SD. IQ or G (general cognitive ability) was not particularly important to SDs focused primarily on shoplifter catching, nor for generalist SDs that were in charge of all LP functions in a single store. G was important, however, for SDs rated as likely supervisors. Future leaders also tended to be slightly less gregarious while also being a little more emotional and prone to appreciate fewer tangible things like art and culture. Perspective. In-store LP people are critical to preventing losses and other crime events in their assigned location(s) and should be treated accordingly. They are in positions to save companies considerable dollars or conversely generate huge liability with their actions or apathy-driven omissions. SDs can also create goodwill and inspire ongoing LP procedural and ethical compliance or help create ill will and motivate apathy or even further deviance. Homework. Conduct a thorough job analysis for the in-store position. Use your documents, high-performing SDs and field supervisors, and external sources to list out the top or most-critical job tasks for the position, as well as the top dozen or so most common situations SDs will be dealing with. Use the data to formulate prioritized lists of these items and build your selection and training programs. Legal Review. Make sure your job analysis and follow-on selection and training processes are carefully conducted, designed to meet job position and departmental objectives, and vetted by a trusted attorney experienced in this topic area.

2017 LP/AP Conferences

As I write this column, I’m just back from the one-two punch of RILA AP and NRF PROTECT. Both conferences were great in my opinion—plenty of practitioners and solution partners to confer with, very good content, ample solution exhibit opportunities, and great fellowship with good people. I’m always impressed with the talent and energy of LP professionals. Next up is the LPRC’s 2017 Impact Conference at UF. It is designed to complement the industry association conferences, never to compete with them. Most LP executives’ companies belong to one or both of the major retail associations, and they can participate in their excellent conferences.




With LPRC, the AP/LP department itself belongs, so their team can participate year-round in the eleven working groups and over thirty-five research and innovation projects (chains). And Impact is the opportunity for these professionals to gather and debrief on the year’s research findings in the Learning Labs, poster session, the Zones Experience, and expert discussion panels. They also reset the working groups’ goals and plan for the next twelve months of projects. We sincerely hope you’ll consider participating in 2017 Impact. The planning team takes great pride in putting together an amazing learning and planning atmosphere with practitioners and scientists working and brainstorming side by side on the beautiful University of Florida campus. Learn more and enroll at lpresearch.org/impact.

In-store LP people are critical to preventing losses and other crime events in their assigned location(s) and should be treated accordingly. They are in positions to save companies considerable dollars or conversely generate huge liability with their actions or apathy-driven omissions. SOCLab Tabletop

At the time of this writing, a team of retail LP and governmental experts alongside our team and innovative technology partners are scripting a realistic active-attacker scenario designed to use the full capabilities of the cutting-edge Security Operations Lab in our UF and LPRC Innovation Lab facility. The plan is to hold one to three tabletop rehearsals to work the bugs out and greatly enhance the SOCLab, with the goal being to demonstrate the exercise this fall. Please stay tuned for details.

UF Now and Next

The University of Florida is laying out its formal retail LP/AP support strategy, and several retail AP executives are serving as advisors to this program. The program has placed one UF intern in a leading LP program as part of refining the program to provide excellent talent to the industry. Likewise, UF’s Evidence-Based LP Online Course and Certificate is completed and being tested now for deployment. More details to come on these and other initiatives.

Recommended Reading

Theory for Practice in Situational Crime Prevention, Crime Prevention Studies, Volume 16, edited by Martha J. Smith and Derek B. Cornish, published by Criminal Justice Press (Monsey, New York). While this book was published in 2003, it is still a powerful primer with several criminologists laying out how to apply opportunity and environmental crime control theories to real-world problems.






hen I first approached this writing assignment on access controls, I brainstormed the usual items on the topic. I realized quickly that a 3,000-word article on the nuances of keys and locks could hold readers’ attention for about the time it takes to core a lock. Instead of providing an article that would end up in the bottom of a bird cage, I chose to discuss my access control experiences to illustrate the similar approaches that have served me well. If successful, you will learn a little about other industries, the pitfalls and lessons learned, and hopefully some insights you can apply to your loss prevention career. If not, you have only lost a few minutes from your day, but hopefully had a chuckle or two—and your canary has gained a new target. My working title for this article is “how a missing camera helped form the foundation of my asset protection strategy in a wide variety of business segments.” (I doubt the editor will use that as the headline.)

What Does Access Control Mean to You? How you respond to this may depend on the industry segment you are working in—distribution, e-commerce, telecommunications, manufacturing, banking, medical, mobile payments, and of course, retail. A simple definition of access control is the methods used to ensure someone requesting access is authorized. While technology and jargon vary, effective access controls deter, detect, and identify noncompliance. This forms the foundation of what we as asset professionals do. Access control evolves with technology and risk, but if we can consistently identify


noncompliant actions and actors, our programs are effective.

“I Had My Reunion Pictures on That Camera”

The words of the irate hotel guest echoed through the lobby and were directed at me. As a college student, I worked overnight as a

The guest demanded someone (meaning me) find her missing Nikon camera that was allegedly stolen from her room while she attended a high school reunion. This was my first investigation, and I was eager to solve the crime.

hotel security officer to pay my tuition. This incident occurred during my first week on the job and provided the foundation of my asset protection philosophy and strategy throughout my retail career. The guest demanded someone (meaning me) find her missing Nikon camera that was allegedly stolen from her room while she attended a high school reunion. This was my first investigation, and I was eager to solve the crime. I took extensive notes on time of theft, description, value, and who had access to the room. The hotel was built in the 1970s and used metal guest keys. My investigation revealed an alarming vulnerability. The amount of uncontrolled access to hotel rooms was shocking. Housekeeping, room inspection, maintenance, and front-desk departments all had master keys and access to rooms. Plus, guests frequently did not return room keys, but the room locks were not changed. Master keys had been lost by employees, yet still locks were not changed. Ultimately the lack of accountability (my emphasis) hampered the investigation, but the experience enlightened me to what is needed to deter, detect, and resolve future situations. The opportunity to test my learnings and design solutions came a few years later in a different hotel.

The Case of the Case That Wasn’t

It was 11:12 p.m. when the phone rang, and a frantic front-desk manager informed me that a guest reported she was assaulted in her room. I immediately met with the visibly shaken woman behind our front-desk area in a private office. The guest (let’s call her Suzan) told me that after attending a





6:00 p.m. company dinner party, she returned to her room at approximately 11:00 p.m. to get ready for bed. Just as she began to disrobe, Suzan said that an assailant (who she described as a male, 6-feet 7-inches tall, 350 pounds, wearing a dark blue hotel-like uniform shirt) came out of the closet, grabbed her shoulders, and threw her down on the bed. Suzan said she screamed, and he backed away enough to allow her to escape the room, slamming the hotel door behind her. Suzan stated she ran to the front desk and reported the incident. The front-desk manager called police, while I headed to the room. When I arrived at Suzan’s room, the door was locked. Upon entering the room, I observed two used wine glasses, the bed was unmade, the windows were locked from the inside, and there was no one in the room. I returned to the security office and downloaded the electronic locks audit trail. This hotel’s lock system had been recently upgraded to record the time of every opening and closing of the hotel door, which keys were used, the name of the guest or employee using the key, and if the door was left open or failed to secure. The first door opening on the day in question occurred at 8:03 a.m. without a key (Suzan exits the room). Later a housekeeper entered the room at 12:58 p.m. and exited at 1:29 p.m. Suzan used her key to enter the room at 4:44 p.m. and exited securing the door at 5:51 p.m. The last key entry occurred at 10:02 p.m. with Suzan’s key. Several exits occurred at 10:34, 10:45, and 11:08 p.m. The recent access control changes implemented made it clear the incident did not happen as described by the guest.

Six Months Earlier… I had started as the evening operations manager for a property management company that had recently assumed day-to-day operations of the hotel and conference center. My responsibilities included risk management, responding

I started with a review of the crimes reported during the past three years, and an alarming trend became apparent. Despite the electronic locks that recorded an audit trail of each lock activation, most crimes were unresolved.

to customer complaints, and managing the security and safety of the property. The new general manager directed me to conduct a risk assessment of the property and submit a corrective action plan. I immediately focused on access and


control. The hotel access control system used electronic locks and programmable keys throughout the guest and conference rooms. I started with a review of the crimes reported during the past three years, and an alarming trend became apparent. Despite the electronic locks that recorded an audit trail of each lock activation, most crimes were unresolved. An assessment of the access-control system and operating procedures provided clarity to the issues. My Initial Assessment. (First the good.) The hotel was equipped with electronic locks that maintained an audit trail of all door lock activity, including when a lock was opened, what key was used, and the time the door was opened and closed. (Now the bad.) The access controls did not provide accountability: ■M aster keys were kept in an unlocked desk overnight. ■A stack of master keys was handed out daily to housekeepers and engineers. ■M aster keys issuance records were not consistently maintained. ■T here was no way to identify the employee or department that used a specific master key. ■G uest and master keys were created at the front desk using generic login credentials shared by fifteen employees. The control lapses existed for convenience, not system limitations, which meant it was possible to fix with a thoughtful plan. My previous experience with the stolen camera motivated me to work to develop a global solution to create accountability: ■ I scheduled meetings with the access-control solution provider to review the system capabilities and discuss best operating practices.



I worked with the provider to determine the best way to create accountability and the procedures to accompany them. ■ I prepared an action plan draft and reviewed it with each department head to understand their concerns of how the changes might impact their teams. ■T he revised action plan was presented to the general manager and approved. Action Steps. The following steps were implemented to correct the deficiencies in the access-control procedures: ■A ll existing master keys were cancelled, and each employee in an approved role was issued a personal master or sub-master key. The key was programmed to operate within their department working hours and was encoded with their name and department. ■F ront-desk personnel were issued their own password-protected login credentials. The change provided accountability for the keys they issued. ■M aster key creation was restricted to three individuals. ■L ost master keys were systemically cancelled when a new master key was created. ■A ll master keyholders attended mandatory onsite training to demonstrate the system capabilities and best practices implemented to protect our guests. ■S trict policy procedures were implemented to restrict guest-room access. ■A system feature was activated that eliminated duplicate issuance and systemically cancelled all keys to a room when a new key was created. ■

to establish the time. This also prevented anyone from entering the room until the police completed their investigation. After obtaining the audit trail for Suzan’s room, I returned to the front desk and provided the information to the police detective who was interviewing Suzan. Upon reviewing the access-control log, he quickly

After obtaining the audit trail for Suzan’s room, I returned to the front desk and provided the information to the police detective who was interviewing Suzan. Upon reviewing the access-control log, he quickly realized the audit trail contradicted Suzan’s statements.

Now Back to Our Story…

Upon leaving Suzan’s room, I secured the room with my master key and double-locked the door


realized the audit trail contradicted Suzan’s statements. The detective questioned Suzan regarding the inconsistencies in her statement. She immediately recanted her story.

The Case of the CFO’s Family Photo

I was recruited to a startup thirty-store retailer to launch their first loss prevention program. My supervisor, the CFO, was a seasoned no-nonsense retailer. Our very first meeting started with typical small talk when I noticed a picture placed prominently on his desk. The picture was of a thin, short-haired person bending over petting a dog. Mistakenly I asked, “Is that your son?” The CFO replied in a stern tone, “No, that’s my wife,” (adjusting the framed photo slightly). Despite the poor start to the meeting, I recovered due to diligent preparation and a simple theme of accountability based on my past access-control experience. I presented a PowerPoint deck outlining my critical path for the next 30/60/90 days with milestones and specific objectives. With only a few changes, he approved my plan. Wanting to make an immediate impact, I scheduled meetings with the other department heads to listen to their loss prevention concerns and solicit ways to assist. My first meeting was with the assistant controller (let’s call him John). He was the older brother of a longtime friend who lobbied senior leadership to start a loss prevention program. John happened to be the person managing alarm installations, false-alarm fines, and cash loss. He asked if I could work with him to research and resolve the continued on page 52




Connect With Your Crew Let your audience choose their preferred platform to increase awareness and participation. Offer engaging e-learning and communication tools to inspire exploration and growth. Feature built-in feedback applications to obtain their creative input. At LPM Media Group, our mobile and digital solutions move meaningful connections from possibility to reality.

#connectwithyourcrew Digital Magazines

Digital Signage

Mobile Awareness Solutions Custom Animation & Video

Online Learning Management



continued from page 50

associated issues. I agreed and began with false-alarm fines. I obtained an Excel data dump of alarm reports covering the past three months. While researching false-alarm activations, I noticed odd activity in a store that was literally a hundred yards from the corporate office. The alarm information showed that the store was frequently opened and closed after store hours in the middle of the night. I brought this information to John’s attention. He thought it might be related to preparation for taking inventory. The store was a high-shrink store and was scheduled for quarterly cycle count inventories. The overnight entries occurred several times every week and sometimes for periods of less than thirty minutes. I requested additional alarm information and point-of-sale (POS) returns and voids going back a year and dug into the data. What I found changed the way the company approached access control. The POS data indicated that two credit cards had been credited more than $30,000 over the past six months. The credits were no-receipt returns and exchanges completed by thirty different user IDs. One of the credit cards belonged to the assistant manager, and the other card belonged to his wife. (Coincidence? I think not.) A review of the transaction dates and times revealed that most returns were completed with the user IDs of employees on their days off or by employees who had left the company. The assistant manager was on vacation, so I conducted a review of the store POS and alarm controls. My Findings. The access control procedures for the POS system were ineffective. ■M anagers, assistant managers, and supervisors could create and delete user IDs.


T erminated employees’ user IDs remained active and were being used. ■T he assistant manager’s user ID had been deleted, and employee user IDs had been recreated that credited his credit card. Next Steps. I partnered with human resources to conduct an interview with the assistant ■

Upon our arrival at the manager’s office, we found the safe door open and two filled deposit bags in the bottom of the safe. The deposit log that was used to record who prepared the deposit was mostly blank.

W hen employees complained the user ID and password did not work, he or another manager reset the password. ■H e re-entered the store to obtain return-to-vendor merchandise, placed it near the register, and completed the returns while he was alone the next day. ■H e stole merchandise through the receiving dock at night and during the day. The Results. This incident led to a strengthening of access controls for the POS system: ■P OS user IDs could only be created systemically after all new employee paperwork was received and entered into payroll. ■U ser IDs could only be deleted systematically upon termination in payroll. ■A POS exception-monitoring system was purchased and implemented. The incident also led to changing access controls for entering the building: ■U pdated alarm pads were installed that required two codes to be entered before the alarms deactivated. ■A n alarm pad was installed at the receiving door and was required to remain alarmed until actively receiving product. ■A larm monitoring software was installed that provided exception reports. ■

The Case of the Safe That Was Not manager that resulted in his theft admission. He admitted that he had: ■D eleted employees’ original user IDs and created new IDs and passwords. ■U sed the new user and password to complete the return.



While I worked at this same retailer, the company’s bank informed us that a store in Tennessee was missing cash deposits totaling $80,000. The store operations team was unable to identify when or who was responsible for the missing deposits. I was part of a corporate team that flew to the store


continued on page 54

EVERY CUSTOMER’S situation is unique. That’s why custom solutions

Advantex line of exit devices & electrical functions

are a big part of what we offer. We relish the opportunity to think

Super heavy duty low energy ADA operator

outside the box. Whether you need guidance with a challenging

Automatically operated door easykits

installation, are inquiring about training or want help making a

Weatherized delayed egress easykits

hardware decision, knowledgeable technicians, with nearly 50

Tailgate detection

years combined experience, are eager to help you think through your specific issues. Just call 800-729-3839.

W W W. D E T E X .C O M/G E N E Y U S S 3



continued from page 52

unannounced to meet with the store employees and assess the problem. Upon our arrival at the manager’s office, we found the safe door open and two filled deposit bags in the bottom of the safe. The deposit log that was used to record who prepared the deposit was mostly blank. No entries were made on the days the deposits went missing. We asked the manager why the safe was kept open, and she replied that during the day the safe was unlocked so that employees could get their register boxes and get change. She went on to state that they had to leave it open because only managers were permitted to have the safe combination. The deposit log was not completed regularly because the store was very busy. The Results. The losses led to several store management changes and revised deposit procedures. Senior leadership approved a plan to: ■ I nstall new safes with a drop safe on top. ■S tores switched to armored car pickup three days a week. ■T he new safes had dual-key control— one for the store and another provided to the armored car company. Once the changes were implemented, no bank deposits were lost again. The company received credit for the cash deposits quicker. The new safes were rolled out to new stores as they opened and retrofitted in existing stores. Follow That Safe. The rollout of the new safes required the use of subcontractors in different parts of the country. In Texas we found that they were not anchored appropriately. One day we received a call from a store manager stating that a truck backed into the store and pulled the safe out of the office. Over the course of several weeks, a series of burglaries occurred in our stores as well as other retailers in Texas. One of the events was caught on video. The video showed a pickup truck circling the parking lot, then backing up to the store, and plowing


through the front window and into the manager’s office. The suspects lassoed the safe with a cable attached to the bumper and pulled the safe out of the store. After similar incidents happened three more times in our stores, we met with our safe provider at the site of the most recent burglary and devised a plan. Working with the solutions provider, we rolled out our

The rollout of the new safes required the use of subcontractors in different parts of the country. In Texas we found that they were not anchored appropriately. One day we received a call from a store manager stating that a truck backed into the store and pulled the safe out of the store.


plan throughout the district. However, before we completed the roll out, the bandits struck again. The Weakest Link. It was 1:07 a.m. when I received the call from a local police officer who notified me of another smash-and-lasso incident in one of our stores. The officer went on to tell me, however, that there was a break in the case. The “break” was a 200-pound bumper (the license plate was still on) and cable that led to our safe. What the burglars didn’t realize was that the safe had been bolted to the concrete floor. Police were able to tie the bumper to the previous burglaries and identify the burglars from the license plate. Lessons Learned. Adapt your controls to changing threats. And sometimes low-tech solutions (bolts into concrete) can solve problems.

Case Closed

Throughout my career in loss prevention, I have worked in many different environments. Using access control as the foundation of the loss prevention strategy has been successful in gaining consensus from leadership due to its simplicity. Understanding the challenges that face the end user of the access controls is the starting point. Ask yourself, if you were the end user, is it easier to follow the controls or go around them? If the answer is go around them, your system needs to be reevaluated. Sometimes granting everyone traceable access is more secure than just allowing access to a few.

DAVE DiSILVA is a loss prevention professional with nearly thirty years of experience in retail leadership roles in analytics, investigations, corporate security, shortage control, supply chain, and e-commerce. Most recently he was senior manager of global asset protection for eBay. DiSilva has been a contributor to LP Magazine since 2011. He can be reached at DaveD@LPportal.com.



180+ Sessions

Stop and Take a Look at our

Innovative Formats


16 Education Tracks Including: Active Shooter

Trending Topics

Business Operations Crime/Loss Prevention Critical Infrastructure Cyber Security Current Events

FREE Expo Floor Education

ESRM Information Security Terrorism Workplace Violence

Earn up to 30 CPEs

...just to name a few!

Register by August 11 and SAVE! securityexpo.org/LPM

CERTIFICATION By Christina Kendall

Professional Membership: What’s in It for You?

Kendall is the marketing and operations coordinator for the Loss Prevention Foundation where she is responsible for overseeing the marketing initiatives as well as delivering operational support in all foundation areas. She is a graduate of the University of North Carolina at Charlotte where she earned a bachelor's in mass media communications. Kendall can be reached at 704-405-4404 or via email at christina. kendall@losspreventionfoundation.org.


ore than a decade ago, the Loss Prevention Foundation (LPF) set out on a mission to educate and bring awareness to the important and fast-growing field of retail loss prevention and asset protection. Now, with two professional certification courses designed for both the seasoned LP veteran and the entry-level professional, the industry is becoming more accomplished than ever before. As a professional organization, the LPF had a vision to further the LP profession through not only certification, but also a membership program. An LPF membership is aimed at keeping you informed, educated, and connected to the world of retail loss prevention and asset protection. Our membership program is designed for any professional interested in accessing an elite network within the LP/AP industry—law enforcement, retail, security, students, recent graduates, and military veterans just to name a few. You may be asking yourself, “Why should I join the LPF, let alone any professional organization?” One of the most important reasons to join is networking.

■ ■

Exclusive Discounts

Another major perk of most professional affiliations are discounts on select items. An LPF membership offers a significant value on services meant to enhance your career and reinforce your knowledge of the LP/AP industry. As an elite member, you will save: ■$ 125 on your LPC recertification fee, which is free with three years of consecutive membership. ■$ 75.50 (10 percent) on full-course payment for LPC. ■ $49.40 (10 percent) on full-course payment for LPQ. ■$ 100s every year with an exclusive opportunity to opt into the Member Rewards program at $19.95 per year. ■3 3 percent on LPF educational events.

Resume Enhancement


Membership in a professional organization can provide you with a way to contact and keep in touch with other industry professionals, which can often lead to valuable business relationships and new career opportunities. An LPF membership gives you the opportunity to join a variety of groups and connect with others to be a part of an exclusive association within your chosen career path. Membership provides contacts at the local, state, national, and even international level. Such contacts can be invaluable when searching for a new position or to expand an existing practice. ■M ember Map—See and connect with LPF members near and far. ■C hat and Connect—Network online with other loss prevention and asset protection professionals. ■S ocial Identity—Securely create your own secure industry social identity by building and sharing your wall, blog, photos, and files with other like-minded professionals.

Learning Resources

Members have access to professional development resources to enhance skills and stay in the loop when it comes to industry changes, events, and information. The LPF offers the following areas of our member site: ■C areer Center—Take time to consider, plan, and actively grow your career with our tips and content. ■E ducation Center—Dig deep into loss prevention professional topics. ■K nowledge Center—Display your expertise while mentoring others through wiki-style knowledge-base contributions.




S tudent Center—Discover and create your LP/AP future. P rofessional Center—Find and connect with industry professionals and academic institutions around the world.

Whether you’re transitioning into the industry or searching for a new position, the key to getting noticed by hiring managers is a well-rounded resume, which means having industry-specific knowledge and proof that you are a serious professional in your chosen field. Being a member of a professional organization can provide you with evidence that you are truly invested in your career.

Contributing to the Industry

Being able to contribute to the development of standards and best practices is a vital part of the relationship between members and their association. The LPF is committed to giving its members the chance to help influence the growth and vision of the foundation by offering opportunities to join several different committees or volunteer for various foundation activities that allow your voice to be heard in improving our standards and processes. By joining the LPF you are supporting our mission and efforts to elevate the loss prevention industry to a respected profession across all retail and business environments. Becoming a supporting member of the LPF connects you with industry leaders and those that share your desire to elevate the professional status of loss prevention practitioners. Your commitment will also serve as a tangible reminder to prospective employers that you have a strategic, long-term vision of the loss prevention profession. To learn more about LPF membership and its benefits, select the Membership tab at losspreventionfoundation.org or contact us at 866-433-5545.


Newly Certified

Following are individuals who recently earned their certifications.

Recent LPC Recipients Meta Bickford, LPC, Belk Department Stores William Brown, LPC, HEB Matthew Brown, LPC, Sears Holdings George Clapper, LPC, Home Depot Sarah Couture, LPC, Walmart Justin Demes, LPC, 7-Eleven Kevin Dodson, LPC, DICK’S Sporting Goods Jason Friedman, LPC, Lowe’s Ryan Funkhouser, LPC, Lowe’s Kimberley Gilchrist, LPC, Indigo Books and Music Dennis Hunter, Jr., LPC, Sears Holdings Kyle Jones, LPC, Walmart Jaclyn Kachur, LPC, Indigo Books and Music Kevin Kurtz, LPC, TJX Anthony Lopez, LPC, Belk Department Stores Stacie Lundberg, LPC, Walmart Amanda Mague, LPC, DICK'S Sporting Goods Timothy Marshall, LPC, Walmart Rebecca McCaffrey, LPC, Walmart Ryan McCarthy, LPC, Lowe’s Andrew McGill, LPC, Sears Holdings Tricia Miller, LPC, Walmart Debra Pullins, LPC, Office Depot Thomas Ryan, LPC, Walmart

Christopher Sacramone, LPC, Walmart Fidelio Salinas, LPC, DSW Alan Shann, LPC, Walmart Eric Surprenant, LPC, CFI, Sobeys Cory Taylor, LPC, Walmart William Thielen, LPC, Goodwill Industries of Manasota Allan Watters, LPC, Stage Stores Christopher White, Sr., LPC, Walmart Rachel Wile, LPC, Sears Holding

Recent LPQ Recipients Stephen Boyd, LPQ, Mississippi College Andrew Brown, LPQ, Goodwill Industries of Southern Nevada Marc Cayer, LPQ, South Country Co-op James Chamberlain, LPQ, Weis Markets Anthony Edwards, LPQ, Inner Parish Security Corporation Byron Gough, LPQ, University of Indianapolis Rodney Jackson, LPQ, Walmart David Jones, LPQ, Home Depot Ashley Lacaillade, LPQ, AEO Paul LaCount, LPQ, Festival Foods Patricia Lundquist, LPQ, Regis Corporation Nigel Matthews, LPQ Michael Mulhern, LPQ, Next Group Adrian Peterson, LPQ, Regis Corporation Michael Simmons, LPQ, Inner Parish Security Corporation Jonathan Tejada, LPQ, Goodwill Industries–Suncoast Brittany Yakimec, LPQ, Cornerstone Co-operative

The Future is NOW in Supply Chain Security

ANNUAL CONFERENCE SEPT 12–13, 2017 Curtis Culwell Conference Center Dallas, Texas

LPM Subscribers get 20% off! Register at ISCPO.org and use Promo code LPM20 Once again we’re bringing together loss prevention, security, and protection professionals working in the global supply chain for two days of education, networking, and collaboration.

• Hear speakers from both private sector and public law enforcement who will tackle issues currently affecting the global supply chain • Network with industry peers, thought leaders • Discover best-in-breed vendors, innovative products, and services • Learn how to formalize LP strategies, implement cost-saving security programs, drive change and get C-level buy-in. Global threats, cyber security, and omnichannel distribution are disrupting and transforming our industry. Attend the only LP conference that advocates security and risk management across the whole supply chain. Get the knowledge and tools you need to stay ahead of the curve and prevent loss.



The ONLY association dedicated to restaurants

Restaurant-specific safety sessions

Restaurant-specific risk sessions

Restaurant-specific loss prevention sessions

The Other Guys

Join the Restaurant Loss Prevention and Security Association (RLPSA) for its 38th Annual Conference specifically devoted to addressing restaurantspecific challenges for loss prevention, risk, and safety professionals. We are the ONLY association dedicated to RESTAURANT Loss Prevention, Safety, and Security professionals. July 30 – August 2, 2017 Las Vegas | M Resort Register today for early bird pricing at www.RLPSAannualconference.com!


A New Approach to LP Systems Deployment


fter thousands of systems installations over the past several years and in the midst of an 1,800-store rollout this year, CONTROLTEK launched a new group christened Professional Services. Behind the unassuming name is a group of industry veterans who came up with a new approach to deploying and servicing EAS and RFID systems. The reason? “We want to make it easier for LP teams to get the technology they need, help them get the ROI they expect, and alleviate the most common pain points in the process,” said David Hardeman, director of client solutions delivery for CONTROLTEK. The new group has rolled out three new services that, according to Hardeman, will make life easier for loss prevention teams David Hardeman who are getting new EAS and RFID systems.

Direct Collaboration with Your IT Department

“Nothing can slow down the deployment of a new loss prevention system like the IT approval processes,” said Tom Meehan, CONTROLTEK’s chief strategy officer and chief information security officer. “Fortunately for our customers, we’ve been through the process many times on both sides of the fence—retail side and the solutions provider side. It was a logical step for us to set up a group that will work with the customer’s

IT department directly, rather than expecting the LP team to act as a go-between.” According to Meehan, IT departments often have lengthy approval processes for new systems, which can include piles of paperwork that needs to be filled out. “Security is their priority, so this is understandable. But this also creates a Tom Meehan burden for the LP department that has to fill out all that paperwork and go through the process while at the same time trying to do their regular work,” said Meehan. “Our Professional Services folks speak the same language as your IT department and can work with them side-by-side to assist in the deployment of your new solution so that you can concentrate on your work and not worry about the technical side of things.”

ROI Analysis and Documentation

To help LP departments win the approval and budget in the boardroom, CONTROLTEK now offers a service that uses industry data to help create a substantiated ROI story. “Through use cases and ROI calculations, we can help your organization understand how the investment will impact the bottom line in expected and often unexpected ways—from lower shrink to better inventory management, merchandise availability, and the

With thousands of successful system installations over the years, CONTROLTEK has established itself as one of the most reliable systems deployment companies in the US, trusted by retail chains large and small. LP MAGAZINE | JULY–AUGUST 2017


SOLUTIONS SHOWCASE CONTROLTEK resulting sales lift and customer retention,” said Steve Sell, CONTROLTEK’s vice president of global sales and marketing. According to Sell, this analysis and documentation will help LP leadership be better prepared when their requests for new systems are challenged. “At the Steve Sell same time, we want to elevate the LP leadership teams in the eyes of the rest of their organizations by showing that loss prevention isn’t just about catching the bad guys; it is there to provide a sales lift, an improved customer experience, and ultimately a positive impact to the bottom line.”

Associate Training

“We know that one of the keys to a successful adoption of a new solution is training,” said Rhett Asher, CONTROLTEK’s director of business development. “This is why our Professional Services group is placing a great deal of emphasis on the training of our customers’ associates.” Rhett Asher According to Asher, CONTROLTEK works directly with loss prevention teams or training departments to develop materials on proper application and removal of tags and use of systems and other solutions being deployed. This includes videos, cheat sheets, webinars, and a team that can answer questions as they come up. “The bottom line is that unless store associates know how to handle the new solution to its full potential, the LP team will

After thousands of systems installations over the past several years and in the midst of an 1,800-store rollout this year, CONTROLTEK launched a new group christened Professional Services. Behind the unassuming name is a group of industry veterans who came up with a new approach to deploying and servicing EAS and RIFD systems. not fully realize the ROI it expects. Our goal is to get store personnel up to speed as quickly as possible.” CONTROLTEK’s new Professional Services group does not aim to revolutionize the LP world. But it has already proven that a new focus is needed when it comes to LP technology, one that places emphasis on saving time and headaches for LP professionals. While the company continues to innovate its product line and offer new solutions every year, the real innovation may prove to be the new processes that make LP professionals’ daily lives easier.

CONTROLTEKS’s First Time Right Program boasts an impressive success rate of 95 percent. A system installation, like this New York location of a major retail chain, counts as First Time Right if four conditions are met: (1) CONTROLTEK technician arrived on time, (2) the equipment was already on site, (3) the work was completed and everything worked as expected, and (4) the customer accepted the install by signing off—all on just one visit.






Supermarket Leverages CAP to Justify Security Budget, Show ROI, and Reduce Shrink by 15 to 20 Percent


sing the CAP Index® Custom Crime Risk Modeling solution, a large supermarket chain was able to identify at-risk locations, reallocate and prioritize resources, quantify operating costs, reduce loss, and improve safety perceptions across 2,800 stores nationwide.

The Challenge

With 74,000 employees and 14.5 million customers a week, there’s no one-size-fits-all solution that could provide ample security to all locations and still fit within a fixed budget. The goal was to optimize, prioritize, and justify the company’s security investments—equipment, use of guards, and so forth—to maximize budget and the security of customers and employees.

The Solution: Custom Risk Modeling from CAP Index

Successfully allocating resources starts with knowing which stores are at risk. CAP Index is the industry-leader in forecasting crime risk by location. By combining CAP’s data with the supermarket’s own internal incident data, the company created a truly customized risk model that was specifically tailored to its corporate goals and objectives. This allowed it to accurately rank its locations and identify which were at risk.

Results Highlights

uard & Equipment Cost Savings. Hard data justified G removing guards from low-risk stores. ■ Quantifying Operating Costs. The model established the cost-to-operate in an area to serve as a baseline for identifying locations performing below or above average. ■ Prioritizing Investment and Reducing Loss. Leveraging the insight from the model, a pilot program was instituted that showed by upgrading specific equipment in elevated risk locations, shrink is reduced by 15 to 20 percent. ■ Reduced Crime Incidents. After ranking stores by CAP risk and reallocating security resources accordingly, the company found that instances of crime reduced by 50 to 60 percent. ■ Improved Safety Perception. Reduced crime makes locations nicer for both employees and customers. After implementation, personal safety perceptions have improved by 35 percent. ■ Optimized Employee Training. To get employees to help deter crime instead of simply react to it, the model prioritized a behavioral training program at elevated risk locations.

“By utilizing a leader like CAP Index, we are now using accurate, objective data to take a lot of the guesswork out and really deliver a smarter, safer, and more costeffective security solution that has tangible ROI. I have no doubts this will be an industry standard practice in a few years or even sooner.” - Supermarket LP Executive

Bottom Line

“By utilizing a leader like CAP Index, we are now using accurate, objective data to take a lot of the guesswork out and really deliver a smarter, safer, and more cost-effective security solution that has tangible ROI. I have no doubts this will be an industry standard practice in a few years or even sooner,” said a loss prevention executive at the supermarket chain. To discuss how CAP Index can help your organization, email askcap@capindex.com, call 800-227-7475, or visit capindex.com.





Reduce Retail Theft with LockUp


electronic manager key, which also offers external power. LockUp was designed specifically for the retail industry, where the shift-based environment and high turnover led to specific management and loss prevention needs. By streamlining electronic management for the retail environment, LockUp offers benefits and savings in reduced initial investment, real estate, and time.

urrently in its twenty-fifth year, the National Retail Security Survey continues to offer not only insightful research into retail crime but also successful countermeasures. Key findings from the most recent survey show that the impact of shrinkage continues to be sizeable, with 48.1 percent of retailers reporting increases in inventory shrink. Just one year ago, employee theft was the fastest-growing crime in America. The Jack L. Hayes International Annual Retail Theft Survey also found that one out of every twenty-seven employees was apprehended for theft in 2016. Now for the second year in a row, shoplifting has surpassed employee theft in inventory shrink, and the average loss per incident has increased. While technology is increasing in use as a deterrent for shoplifting, more advanced technology has not yet caught on. Furthermore, technology and hiring practices for deterrence of dishonest employees has dropped, reflecting the change in shrinkage concerns from employee theft to shoplifting.

Innovative Uses

Proven Methods

With changes in technology and trends shifting so quickly, what proven methods empower retailers to attack shrinkage from both sides of the cash wrap? Digilock’s® patented technology and responsiveness to market demands ensures its out-of-the-box solutions are simple, versatile, and most of all, secure. LockUp® delivers a top-of-the-line employee locker complete with the security of a shared-use keypad lock. The locker is manufactured from heavy-gauge, powder-coated metal to withstand heavy use in the most demanding environments. It is delivered ready-to-use, fully assembled with a pre-programmed electronic keypad lock. Options include a clear polycarbonate door, giving store managers the ability to see the contents inside the employee lockers, contributing to internal theft prevention. The procedure is simple: store employees gain access to their lockers with the entry of a self-selected four-digit code, and management controls and audits the lockers by using an




Although LockUp was designed with employee storage and internal theft in mind, one retailer saw LockUp as a way to deter the increase in shoplifting incidents in high-risk, high-crime areas by adopting a common practice used in Europe. By placing lockers at major entrances, the stores provide a service to their customers—giving them a secure but temporary space to store backpacks and large bags while shopping. The stores are also able to limit concealed theft by being able to remove backpacks and duffle bags from the sales floor. In fact, within the initial testing phase of one month, merchandise theft via concealed backpacks and duffle bags decreased to almost nothing. In addition to reducing internal shrinkage resulting from employee theft, Lockup has proven to be a viable solution for retailers seeking to reduce incidents of shoplifting within their stores. For retailers, LockUp lockers, backed with the expertise and innovation of Digilock’s simple-to-use and easy-to-manage storage system, strengthen loss prevention strategies while enabling management to take proactive steps to ensure merchandise is not lost or stolen, whether from the back-of-house employee storage or front-of-house shoplifting. Through Digilock’s commitment to innovation, LockUp has proven itself to be a cost-competitive solution for secure personal storage and shrink-reduction. Visit lockup.com for more information.



Top Five Secrets for Making the Outsourcing Decision


o far 2017 has been a very challenging year for retail companies. The number of retail companies that have filed for bankruptcy, closed locations, or dramatically reduced their budgets are clearly shaping this year to be one of the worst years in retail. The challenge most retailers face is simply a lack of resources available to sustain a proactive LP program. Even maintaining a consistent LP presence in all store locations can be a stretch as most field personnel are used to immediately address cases of theft or other critical areas of concern. If you’re an LP director working for a challenged retailer that is closing stores and comps are flat, you have an obligation to help create the most profit you can. You can’t just sit back and hope it passes. You must become a true partner in profitability, take some leadership, and take some risk. A consideration for retailers is to outsource portions of their loss prevention programs or their entire loss prevention function. While this is certainly a consideration for some retailers, outsourcing is not a one-size-fits-all solution. For example, consider your current shrink. If it’s on par or below the national average, outsourcing may not be for you. However, if your shrink rate is an immediate concern, also consider your size. Outsourcing works best for smaller retailers that are geographically dispersed but have limited internal resources. If you’ve determined that outsourcing is the best option for you, the next challenge is to pick a partner. As with any outsourced vendor, the decision to move forward with such a critical portion of your business should be based not only on what types of services they can provide, but also how they demonstrate an exact understanding of your operations and needs. Here are the top five secrets to consider before making the choice to outsource: 1. Coverage. Does the provider have adequate and reliable resources near all of your store locations? If they only cover a small percentage of your store locations, the expense for them to travel may be just as much as sending your own team. 2. Staffing and Certification. Are all staff, including those in field locations, full-time employees? This ensures the accountability and consistency in delivery of your services. Also, as this vendor will act as a primary or secondary “face” of your department, ensure that all members are properly trained and certified. 3. Culture. Communication with your internal team and a demonstrated understanding of your business drivers are crucial

to your program success. If they do not demonstrate a thorough understanding of any of these areas, the partnership will not be a success. 4. Insurance and License. Does the vendor have all the appropriate insurance coverage, are they properly licensed, and how do they demonstrate it? 5. Measurement. The vendor should be able to quickly and clearly demonstrate other cases of reduced shrink, improvement in earnings, and heightened program awareness at all associate levels. While outsourcing is not the best option for all retailers, for some, it has provided the opportunity to shift the loss prevention program from a reactive to a positive state, leading to heightened associate awareness, reduced shrink, and improved earnings.

Your LP Partner

LP Innovations is the only nationwide, single-source provider of loss prevention solutions for the retail industry with a dedicated full-time field staff. Since its inception in 1998, LP Innovations has provided its rapidly growing customer base with a variety of innovative solutions proven to protect profit and reduce shrink. Its expert team is dedicated to maximizing your profitability through proven shrink reduction programs, uncompromising customer service, and its unique ability to seamlessly integrate into diverse business cultures. LP Innovations’ services include: ■ Compliance and Control Audits ■ Investigative Consulting ■ Exception-Based Reporting and Analysis ■ Training and Awareness Materials ■ Mystery Shopping ■ Loss Prevention Consulting ■ Location Risk Assessments ■ Civil Demand and Recovery From a nationwide field staff of loss prevention auditors and certified investigators to a dedicated staff of exception-based reporting analysts and experienced program directors, LP Innovations provides its customers with best-in-class services, helping to build and maintain stronger and cost-effective loss prevention programs. For more information about our services, visit lpinnovations.com.




Open System Design Protects High-Theft Products While Enhancing the Customer Experience


hen combating shrink, it’s important for retailers to pursue common-sense solutions in their stores. Many loss prevention products in the market today are closed systems that keep merchandise under lock and key, which can have as dramatic of an impact on sales as product theft. Also, many loss prevention products are limited in functionality. This issue is where Southern Imperial’s patented SONR System comes into play. The SONR uses an open system design, allowing shoppers to remove and replace the

different sounds to specific product lines to give them an indication of where activity is taking place in the store. For retailers requiring an additional tier of security, the SONR System links into more existing security and communication systems to suit store needs. The SONR Echo Box features different signal output ports to integrate with existing security systems, such as an overhead intercom system or public video monitor (PVM). For example, in addition to the SONR alarm, the Echo Box can also instantly

product without assistance while simultaneously drawing associate attention to activity. Moreover, the SONR is a multitiered security solution that allows retailers to control the level of security for their products.

activate a video monitor showing the effected retail area. These measures work to prevent theft, but also keep all items open and available to potential shoppers.

Multiple Levels of Security

Shoplifters are discouraged from theft as risk increases. The SONR system can add multiple levels of security as the need arises. Its basic level of security starts with the SONR Hook. Merchandise removed from the hook by raising the attached label holder triggers the initial response. Once raised, a warning beep is emitted to alert store personnel that there is activity in the area. For the second tier of security, an Echo Box can be added into the system to mimic all alerts. The Echo Box, which is installed up to fifteen to twenty feet away, will relay all alerts on the floor to a central point for store associates. Unlike other security products, no deactivator is required to reset the alarm. The system Echo Box can be quickly reset as well. The SONR System can be scaled to handle multiple store product lines at a time. The Echo Box features multiple frequencies options that allow store associates to assign




Keeping Products Visible, Accessible, and Shoppable

Placing merchandise behind lock and key (closed systems) has been shown to decrease sales by as much as 38 percent. SONR Hook provides retailers with a viable solution for displaying valuable items without losing them to shrink. It keeps product visible, accessible, and most importantly, shoppable. To find out more information on Southern Imperial and the SONR Hook, please visit intelligentlossprevention.com or call directly at 1-800-747-4665.



Keeping Safety and Security Top of Mind F

ollowing are a few article summaries that can provide you with a small taste of the original content available to you every day through our daily digital offerings, which are offered free through LossPreventionMedia.com. In addition to our daily newsletter, a comprehensive library of original content is available to our digital subscribers at no cost to you. Visit our website to gain access to all of our content. You can also follow us on Facebook (search LP Voices), Twitter (@LPMag), and LinkedIn.

Active-Shooter Response Has Evolved over Time By Bill Turner, LPC

When it comes to active-shooter response, there is no single tactic that guarantees 100 percent positive results for law enforcement and individuals. Methods are still evolving and being debated. But one trend is common: a more aggressive reaction. One of the most-remembered mass shootings in the second half of the twentieth century was the University of Texas tower shooting on August 1, 1966. On that day, Charles Whitman climbed to the observation deck of the main building, from where he shot and killed fifteen people in an hour and a half. At the time, standard active-shooter response from law enforcement was to have the first officer on scene establish a perimeter to contain the suspect and victim. This approach maximized officer safety and protected the public outside the scene. It also minimized equipment and training costs for law enforcement and allowed time for SWAT to arrive. But these reasonable tactics assumed perpetrators were rational and would negotiate and release hostages. A lot has changed since then. Today, law enforcement often faces suicidal attackers whose desire is to inflict the maximum number of casualties, including themselves in the death toll. Establishing a perimeter and negotiating is no longer effective in all situations. This was made clear in the Columbine, CO, school shooting of 1999. Police established a perimeter and waited a long time to enter the building and attempt to confront the shooters. Because of this delay, many more students were killed.




By Jacque Brittain, LPC, and Kelsey Seidler Brittain is editorial director, digital, and Seidler is managing editor, digital. The two manage the magazine’s digital channels that includes multiple daily e-newsletters featuring original content and breaking news as well as vibrant social media conversations. Brittain can be reached at JacB@LPportal.com and Seidler at KelseyS@LPportal.com.

After Columbine, law enforcement began to develop more aggressive active-shooter response protocols. First, officers on scene were taught to immediately enter and attempt to engage shooters, using whatever equipment they carried with them. This tactic assumed most attackers were relatively incompetent and could be silenced by a well-trained responder. Attackers have changed. As a result, modern active-shooter response training has changed—again. Nearly all law enforcement officers are now highly trained for these incidents and have active-shooter “kits” in their patrol cars. Today, many officers will immediately enter an area to confront an active shooter. The theory is that, when confronted with law enforcement, shooters will turn their attention to them and away from victims. These tactics have proven reasonably successful, although the emergence of highly motivated terrorists, whose weapons go way beyond guns, has necessitated continual evolvement of active-shooter response tactics. Although not universal, some recent guidelines include: ■A ssess the situation and report immediately. ■M ove the public away from the danger zone, if possible. ■T ake cover from gunfire but not cover from view (concealment). ■A djust response based on the situation—await heavily armed forces, negotiate, or immediately confront perpetrators. “OK,” you say, “that is the active-shooter response plan for law enforcement, but what about me?” For individuals, guidelines for active shooter response remain fairly constant: ■G ET OUT—evacuate immediately moving away from gunfire. ■H IDE OUT—if you can’t evacuate, take immediate cover, hopefully in a locked room. In addition, barricade the door, if possible. ■T AKE OUT—attack the shooter (with anything you have) if you have no other choice. Obviously, no one ever wants to be caught in an active-shooter situation. Fortunately, the odds are against it. But understanding active-shooter response tactics and methods, both for law enforcement and individuals, will go a long way to keep you safer, just in case. LOSSPREVENTIONMEDIA.COM

Best-Ever IOBSE Conference Hosted at Walmart Headquarters

Stop Theft by Shoplifting: Two Ways to Influence Potential Offenders

The International Organization of Black Security Executives (IOBSE) held its 2017 annual meeting April 25–27 at Walmart headquarters in Bentonville, AR. “This year’s conference was an amazing event and one of the best ever,” said Don Knox, CPP, CITRMS, director of enterprise security, crisis management, and business Don Knox, CPP, CITRMS continuity for Sears Holdings, and current president of the IOBSE. “We wish to thank Walmart for their extraordinary hospitality in hosting this year’s conference.” The organization’s annual meeting is focused on providing an educational forum for attendees to learn about emerging trends in the security industry as well as offer ample time for networking with peers. Presenters included executives from Gap Inc., Ross Stores, Walmart, Sears, CVS, Tyco, LinkedIn, and The University of Central Florida. Presentation topics included: ■T he new dynamics of threat assessments ■B uilding and leading high-performance teams ■L eading change ■A ctive-shooter response and others

The following describes a cornerstone theory of judgment and decision-making that has tremendously important implications in loss prevention. The elaboration likelihood model (ELM) of persuasion, developed by Petty and Cacioppo, postulates a dual-process manner in which Mike Giblin decision-makers take in and process information. Bottom line for LP: even if offenders honestly aren’t able to report that they consciously noticed a deterrent designed to stop theft by shoplifting, the presence of one still may have affected their behavior and decision-making processes. Likewise, even if a customer says they didn’t notice or weren’t bothered by an LP measure, it still may affect their shopping experience. Observation of behavioral data (watching outcomes) is superior to first-hand accounts (asking opinions) for this and other reasons.

Keith White, LPC, of Gap Inc. (left) and Christina White of Ross Stores talked on the topic of “Building, Developing, and Leading High Performance Corporate Loss Prevention and Security Teams.”

Peripheral Route When presented with stimuli, we do an initial sweep and determine what deserves our attention and cognitive resources. Think of a drive home from work that you’ve done so many times that you take it in autopilot, where you’d be unable to tell me any specifics of what you saw on the way home that day. Another classic example is finding ourselves humming a song and wondering why. We didn’t attend to a song while it played on the radio earlier that day, and if you asked us if we’d heard it that day, we’d say no. That song has been processed through our peripheral route and affected our behavior despite never being centrally or consciously processed. In the case of LP, offenders may not realize that they’ve seen and been deterred by a loss prevention measure, a clean parking lot, the police officer they saw three blocks from arriving at the store, or any other subtle stimulus. They’re not able to identify these stimuli as having had an effect on them because they were processed through a peripheral route.

By Loss Prevention Media Staff

Two discussion panels on security convergence and building your professional brand were also enthusiastically received by attendees. Walmart executives on the security convergence panel included Jerry Geisler, Gary Smith, Tom Arigi, and Ken Sensor. Not shown was Anthony Williams also from Walmart, who moderated the panel. One of the unique aspects of the IOBSE conference is its sponsorship of college students interested in the security industry who attend the conference as guests of the organization. This year, twenty-seven students from universities across the country were among the attendees. The conference concluded with their traditional black-tie dinner where several members were recognized for their contributions to the security industry. For more information about the IOBSE, visit iobse.org. To learn about the origins of the organization, read LPM’s past feature story, “IOBSE: A Message of Workplace Inclusion and Leading with Purpose.”

By Mike Giblin, LPRC

Background Understanding the intricacies of the decision process is paramount if one wishes to alter that process. Otherwise, you’re simply inputting changes into a black box and observing each output with no real understanding of how the strings are being pulled, what mechanism is responsible for any changes seen, and/or how to adjust or replicate the changes. The ELM model is highly regarded as a theory of attitude change and offers valuable insight on how decision-makers take in and process relevant information. It posits two distinct routes to information processing and therefore two routes to influencing decisions.



This finding is one of the major reasons that the social science and business fields strongly prefer observing behavior to asking about behavior. Asking misses out on this important category of influencers.

D isseminating the trigger criteria to supervisors and managers. A threat management unit (TMU) will vary in size and complexity depending on the organization, but members might include legal counsel, security, and threat assessment specialists, managers, and a licensed behavioral psychologist. However, even retail organizations that use outside expertise to conduct threat assessments require internal threat assessment knowledge. Having skilled personnel at a facility or store is critical for knowing when risk factors or patterns of behavior suggest that an outside expert—or the threat team at corporate headquarters—needs to be called upon to more closely assess a situation and provide recommendations for violence prevention strategies. Plus, there may not be time. Internal personnel need to be sufficiently skilled and confident enough to take action in an acute situation. Retail safety training is a good place to start. ■

Central Route Central-route processing occurs when a stimulus catches our attention and is determined to be worthy of our cognitive resources. At this point, we’ve noticed the stimulus, and it enters our conscious thoughts. Most anything that you would consider an influencer of decisions has probably entered through the central route. Offenders are aware of messages received via central-route processing. Everything they tell you affected their decision did so through the central route. This process and subject has been well studied in the LP industry as one significant way to stop theft by shoplifting. Implications Peripheral-route-processed stimuli are important drivers of decisions and need to receive further attention in the LP world. They’re often the same deterrents or process changes that we’ve put in place and currently believe to have minimal effect on customers or offenders due to lack of expressed feedback from those groups. Just because a shoplifter reports, and in fact believes, that they didn’t notice or were unaffected by a security measure or incidental environmental factor does not mean it did not affect them. It simply means that it was not processed centrally. Similarly, just because customers don’t notice and report not being put off by LP does not mean that this is truly the case, even if the customer believes it to be. Measuring behavior is the only reliable way to get the full scope of a treatment’s effect. Sales, shrink, behavioral incidence data of retail theft events, dwell-time data, and conversion data are paramount for research in loss prevention. Video analytics to code and understand behavioral outcomes is a growing and exciting data source.

More on LossPreventionMedia.com

For more original news content, see the following articles: ■C redit Card Fraud News and Updates ■T ough Retail Industry News Keeps Coming ■P oor Handling of a Crisis Can Damage a Company’s Reputation Almost Immediately ■F inding Effective Violence Prevention Strategies ■A ctive Threat Response: Keys to Success ■H ow to Handle Workplace Safety Issues Efficiently ■M aintain a Positive Outlook among Your Loss Prevention Staff ■H ow to Detect a Liar: Research on Cultural Differences and Screening Devices ■M aximizing Value from Retail Store Safety Measures ■A mateur Shoplifters: Are They Just Plain Crooks, or Are They Sick? ■P laying the Long Game: Retailers’ Reaction to Shoplifting Today Impacts Crime for Decades ■P utting the Brakes on Counterfeit Merchandise and Brand Erosion ■5 Omni-channel Retailing Examples in 2017

Effective Threat Assessment and Violence Prevention Strategies By Garett Seivold

The goal of a retailer’s threat assessment unit or process is to prevent and reduce the incidence of targeted violence by identifying potential perpetrators and managing the risks of violence. To effectively meet that mission, four important elements stick out: ■D eveloping criteria that should trigger a threat assessment investigation; ■ I dentifying individual(s) within the organization responsible for receiving information and conducting or contracting for threat investigations; ■N otifying managers and supervisors about the threat assessment program and;



Professional Development ■S uccessful Careers in Loss Prevention Start

with Volunteering LPM Voice ■ I s It Time for LP to Embrace Its Creative Side? ■B uyer, Beware: 4 Warning Signs of a Bad ■


Contract Agreement I s Identification the Missing Piece in the War against ORC? How Might Your LP Operation Benefit from Retail’s RFID Revolution





Providing auditable locking

solutions for case goods, fixtures, and employee lockers.


ve vati



| p

ted aten


olo chn


ec | s


or er st


lut o s e


707.766.6000 | d i g i l o c k . c om

LP MAGAZINE | JULY–AUGUST 2017 LPM_LockUpNumeris_4_583x4_625-edit.indd 1


6/14/17 9:24 AM

PEOPLE ON THE MOVE Juan Ospina was promoted to director of field LP at Michael Kors.

Daniel Robles was promoted to senior AP investigator at Abercrombie & Fitch.

Brian Akonom, CFI, CORCI, is now a regional LP manager, Amanda Peterson is now a market investigator, and Ben Mathis Jr. is now a market LP auditor at Family Dollar.

Ryan Clevenger is now director of AP at Albertsons-Safeway.

Katelyn Dube is now LP zone manager at The Fresh Market.

Ami Caldwell is now safety manager, Sal Nunez was promoted to LP manager II, Denis Prose is now a logistics LP manager, Yosef Messina was promoted to regional LP logistics manager, and Lee Boland is now program manager of global inventory protection at Amazon.

Michael Martinelli was promoted to district LP manager, and Steve Korhummel was named senior LP manager at Gap Inc.

Garrett Atkins, LPC, was promoted to division LP manager, and James (Bobby) Blaise is now a district LP manager at NAPA Auto Parts.

Andrew Chapman was named senior VP of sales at 3VR.

Eric Brill is now senior manager of security operations at Ascena Retail Group. Danielle Bronicki was promoted to director of store operations, and Catherine Riccards is now director of investigations at Barnes & Noble. Damien Needham was promoted to LP market manager at Bealls. Jim Behrend, CFI, LPC, is now national director of AP supply chain at Best Buy. Andrew Phillips and Amanda Kilpatrick are now area AP leaders at Big Lots. Harold McIntyre, CFI, LPC, was promoted to market director of AP at Bloomingdale’s. Kathy Martucci was promoted to director of LP operations, and Daniel Bambas, LPQ, is now a multi-unit LP manager at Bowlmor AMF. Teresa Warren was promoted to head office AP manager at B&Q (United Kingdom). Steve Schwartz, MBA, CFI, is now a regional LP manager at Burlington Stores. Rachel (Meyer) Stegeman is now a fraud specialist at Cabela’s. Tom Meehan, CFI, was named chief strategy officer and chief information security officer at CONTROLTEK. Donnie Dugger was promoted to director of LP, Sean C. Balducci is now area LP director, Deane Benedetti is now a regional LP manager, and Travis Berry is now a market investigator at CVS Health. Scott Dunn was promoted to divisional LP director at Dollar General. Victor Chung is now manager of global investigations for Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp, Messenger, Oculus, and Internet.org at Facebook.

Jesper Just Jensen was named VP of products at Milestone Systems.

Jacob Gordon, LPC, CFE, CFI, PI, and Joshua Carroll, CFI, are now district LP managers at Nike.

Peter Bradley was named senior director of LP at GardaWorld.

Steven LaPres is now a district LP manager at Ollie’s Bargain Outlet.

Larry Hudson was promoted to district LP manager at Gordmans/Stage Stores.

Melanie (Meschwitz) Millaway, CFI, was promoted to area director of LP and safety, and Bryan Hillman is now LP and safety regional director, central super region and international at PetSmart.

Andrew Kerley was promoted to divisional profit protection business partner at Halfords (UK).

Sebastien Sejean is now global corporate security and AP manager at Ralph Lauren.

Andrea Lykes is now director of LP at Harbor Freight Tools. Melisa (Nieves) Alarcon and John Johnson are now district LP managers at Homegoods.

Greg Stocker, CFI, was named director of safety and security at Red Roof Inn.

Bob Casar, CFE, is now director of LP at HS Brands International.

Kyle Tomlin, CMP, was promoted to VP, education and events at the Retail Council of Canada.

Kregg Carney, CFI, was promoted to director of LP at International Coffee & Tea.

Brian J. Aquilina is now senior director of organizational safety, security, and investigations, and Daniel Rodriguez is now an area LP manager at Ross Stores.

Ricardo J. Hernandez II, Dale Jackson, and Andrew Trumbour, LPC, are now area AP managers at JCPenney.

Carlos Portela was made a district manager of AP at Saks Fifth Avenue.

Chris McCarrick, CFI, was named senior manager of AP solutions at Kroger.

Corey Freeman, CFI, was promoted to corporate investigations manager at Save-A-Lot Food Stores.

Matthew Custer is now a regional AP manager, and Rayne Jorrin and Carolina Donneys are now district AP investigators at L Brands.

Jose Herrera is now a market manager of asset and profit protection, Brad Devig was promoted to area asset and profit protection manager, and Susan Grieve Dahl was promoted to senior analyst, asset and profit protection at Sears Holdings.

Steve Mathieu was promoted to senior manager of LP, Quebec district at Loblaw Companies. Brian Farrar is now a district AP manager at Lord & Taylor.

Phil Hopkins, Heather O’Brien, John Slattery, Marilyn Sussan, Phil Hopkins, Heather O’Brien, John Slattery, and Marilyn Sussan have been named to the Security Executive Council.

Mike Giblin was promoted to senior research scientist at the Loss Prevention Research Council. Albert Latham, JD, LPC, was promoted to LP and operations support director at Lowe’s.

Anthony Gaston was promoted to area LP investigator at Sephora.

Samuel A. Velazquez is now a regional LP manager at LP Innovations. Wallace Parks was promoted to district director of AP, Jamie Van Dusen was promoted to regional director of investigations, and Thomas Lunt and Octavio Andres Garcia Torres are now district managers of investigations at Macy’s. Mike Vesci was made a regional AP manager at Meijer.

Michael Hagenbush, CFI, was promoted to director of corporate LP, compliance, and reporting at Sherwin-Williams. Sarah Kunkes, MS, was promoted to senior manager of AP analytics and pharmacy at Southeastern Grocers. Ernie Deyle is now chief strategy and client services officer at Spark Analytics.

Elena Mencos, CFI, CFE, Bill Freedman, and John Morris are now LP and safety managers, and Janelle Holloway is now a LP cash manager at SSP America. Bert Rushton was named corporate LP manager, support center at SSP America. Cory Arnsperger, LPC, and Stacey Brinig-Baker are now district AP managers at Stage Stores. Andrea Weir is now an area AP manager at Stein Mart. Dale Duquette was named director of AP at Stop & Shop Supermarket. Mike Keenan, CFI, was named managing director of retail LP at TAL Global. Alyssa Nayyar was promoted to senior corporate security tech, crisis management, and Casey Blythe, MS, was promoted to market investigator at Target. TJX Companies made the following changes: Travis Bolin to distribution center manager of LP; Krystal Buchanan, Tim Mandahl, and Jennifer Briggs to district LP managers; and Jevonne Woods to senior organized retail crime investigator. Ahlam Elhammiri was promoted to district LP manager at TJX Canada/Winners. Karolina Gajkowska was promoted to design and support specialist, LP at TJX Europe. Shanna Gianchiglia, CFI, was promoted to senior regional LP manager at T-Mobile. Mike A. Valle, CFI, is now a regional LP manager, and Chris Austin is now an area LP manager at ULTA Beauty. Michael Volin is now regional director of risk and safety at United Natural Foods. Jill Evans-Aldhizer was named national sales representative at USS. Jeff Meyer was promoted to area AP manager at Victoria’s Secret. Walmart announced the following changes: Joe Schrauder to VP of AP and safety; Melissa Wacha, LPQ, to director of AP operations; Mathew Logan to regional AP director; Vincent Sonner to senior manager of global security, insider trust; Amany Shalabi to regional director of AP; Steve Burton to regional AP director, Metro New York; and Michael Oren, CFI, to regional ethics and compliance manager. David Thompson, CFI, was promoted to VP of operations at Wicklander-Zulawski.

To stay up-to-date on the latest career moves as they happen, sign up for LP Insider, the magazine’s daily e-newsletter, or visit the Professional Development page on the magazine’s website, LossPreventionMedia.com. Information for People on the Move is provided by the Loss Prevention Foundation, Loss Prevention Recruiters, Jennings Executive Recruiting, and readers like you. To inform us of a promotion or new hire, email us at peopleonthemove@LPportal.com.





-  

   

   

-  - 

   


  

   


ADVERTISERS 3SI Security Systems.....................................9 3sisecurity.com/gpstracking 7PSolutions....................................................69 7pgps.com AFA..................................................................69 afap.com Appriss Retail..................................................5 apprissretail.com ASIS................................................................55 securityexpo.org/lpm Bold Technologies........................................69 boldgroup.com/lp CAP Index.......................................................21 capindex.com Certified Forensic Interviewer ...................71 certifiedinterviewer.com Checkpoint.....................................................35 checkpointsystems.com ClickIt Inc.........................................................7 clickitinc.com


Washington Group Plaza, Boise orcaid.org July 10–11, 2017

September 19, 2017

Conference Chicago at University Center cybersecurity-symposium.com

The International Centre Mississauga, ON rcclpconference.ca

CyberSecurity International Symposium

July 20–21, 2017

Florida Retail Federation Annual Loss Prevention Conference

Gaylord Palms Resort and Convention Center, Orlando sunshineexpo.com July 25, 2017

Organized Retail Crime in Idaho 3rd Annual Conference

Washington Group Plaza, Boise orcaid.org July 30–August 2, 2017

Restaurant Loss Prevention & Security Association Annual Conference

CONTROLTEK.................................................13 controltekusa.com/flatguard

M Resort, Las Vegas rlpsa.com

Cyber Security Summit................................65 cybersummitusa.com

August 8, 2017

Detex...............................................................53 detex.com/geneyuss3

Hyatt Regency Chicago cybersummitusa.com

Cyber Security Summit

Digilock...........................................................69 digilock.com

August 14–16, 2017

Industrial Security Solutions.......................31 isscorpus.com

Intercontinental New York Times Square axis.com

InstaKey Security Systems.........................23 instakey.com/retail ISCPO..............................................................57 iscpo.org Loss Prevention Foundation........................33 losspreventionfoundation.org LPjobs.com.....................................................43 lpjobs.com LPM Media Group...................................45, 51 lpmmediagroup.com Protos Security................................................3 protossecurity.com Restaurant Loss Prevention & Security Association.............................58 rlpsaannualconference.com Security Resources......................................75 securityresources.net Tyco Integrated Security.............................76 synergyinretail.com USS....................................................................2 ussinnovate.com ViewZ..............................................................69 viewzusa.com


Organized Retail Crime in Idaho 3rd Annual Conference

Axis Communications Retail Leadership Forum

August 16, 2017

GRAORCA 7th Annual Retail Crime Conference AmericasMart Building 2 Atlanta, GA graorca.org September 12–13, 2017

International Supply Chain Protection Organization 2017 Conference Curtis Culwell Conference Center, Garland, TX iscpo.org September 14, 2017

Retail Council of Canada Loss Prevention Conference

September 21, 2017

Carolinas Organized Retail Crime Alliance 2nd Annual Conference

Sheraton Imperial Hotel and Convention Center, Durham, NC corca.org September 20–22, 2017

LP Magazine Annual Meeting

The Renaissance Nashville losspreventionmedia.com September 25–28, 2017

ASIS International 63rd Annual Seminar and Exhibits

Kay Bailey Hutchison Convention Center, Dallas asisonline.org October 2–4, 2017

Loss Prevention Research Council Impact 2017 Conference

University of Florida, Gainesville lpresearch.org October 16–19, 2017

Coalition of Law Enforcement and Retail 8th Annual ORC Training Conference

Menger Hotel, San Antonio, TX clearusa.org October 17, 2017

COORCA 2017 Western US Anti-Organized Crime Conference

Denver (CO) PPA Event Center coorca.org October 18–19, 2017

Cyber Security Chicago

McCormick Place, Chicago, IL cybersecurity-chicago.com

Retail Association of MA 11th Annual New England Loss Prevention Expo

November 8, 2017

DCU Center, Worcester, MA retailersma.org

The Westin Copley Place, Boston cybersummitusa.com

September 15, 2017

November 29, 2017

Grand Hyatt New York cybersummitusa.com

The Beverly Hilton, Los Angeles cybersummitusa.com

Cyber Security Summit



Cyber Security Summit

Cyber Security Summit




VENDOR ADVISORY BOARD ADT/Protection 1 Rex Gillette Vice President of Sales

CA Partnership Program Lohra Miller President and CEO

ALTO US Karl Langhorst, CPP, CFI Executive Vice President

CAP Index Stephen B. Longo Vice President, Strategic Initiatives

American Public University Tatiana Sehring Director, Corporate & Strategic Relationships

Checkpoint Stuart Rosenthal Vice President Sales

Appriss Retail Tom Rittman Vice President, Marketing Axis Communications Hedgie Bartol, LPQ Business Development Manager, Retail Best Security Systems (BSI) John Gantenbein President

ClickIt Inc. Jim Paul Director of Sales ControlTek Steve Sell Vice President, Global Sales & Marketing Detex Ken Kuehler National Account Manager

FireKing Security Group James Currey Senior Vice President Cash Management Solutions Industrial Security Solutions Dave Sandoval President InstaKey Security Systems Cita Doyle, LPQ Director of Sales & Marketing

Securitas Electronic Security Terrie Ipson Director of Marketing Security Resources Patricia M. Rusak Director of Sales Southern Imperial Robb Northrup Marketing Manager

LP Innovations Steven May President/CEO

Tyco Integrated Security Kevin E. Lynch, LPC Executive Director, Business Development

Nedap Retail Patrick O’Leary Vice President & General Manager the Americas

Universal Surveillance Systems Adel Sayegh Chief Executive Officer

Protos Security Kris Vece, LPQ Director of Client Relations


Verisk Retail Cheryl Blake Vice President The Zellman Group Stuart Levine, CFI, CFCI CEO



You Are a Good Guy, Gene Smith A

Jim Lee, LPC Executive Editor

s I think a lot of you know, Gene Smith, president of the Loss Prevention Foundation, recently announced his retirement. I have had the pleasure to know Gene for a very long time—since his first days in retail security at Montgomery Ward fresh from college at Eastern Kentucky. Regardless of his growth in his career and his accomplishments, some things remained constant over those years. Gene believes: ■ The more you give of yourself with no expectation of return, the more will come back to you from the most unexpected sources. ■ You should always seek to be trusted, admired, and respected as a person and a professional.

ou should invest time and emotion necessary to Y maintain a high-quality home life. ■ You should treat others with kindness, courtesy, and compassion. A very impressive career and personal resume, don’t you think? At the recent NRF PROTECT loss prevention conference, Gene was recognized as the recipient of the Ring of Excellence award. I, along with several hundred others, witnessed this ceremony and heard Gene’s remarks afterward. Now we pass along Gene’s acceptance speech to the many thousand readers of the magazine. ■

A special thanks to the entire NRF team for making this such a memorable occasion. This is truly the greatest honor that one can receive in our profession because it requires a vote by your peers. And thank you to the NRF advisory council, past Ring of Excellence members, and others for your support. I am humbled. First, it is not I who has accomplished all of those things; it was us—all of you, all of our partners, solution providers, our board, volunteers, and my mentor. Someone asked me recently if I had a wish for our profession what would it be? I pondered that question, and here is my answer—sorry, I have more than one wish. ■ I wish more of you would take adult learning more seriously, formal and informal opportunities. ■ I wish more of you realized it is your responsibility to educate yourself and not your employers’. ■ I wish you would all invest more time in a continuous learning plan. By doing so, you will maximize your career opportunities. ■ I wish you all would find your passion and follow it, but I caution you not to put all of your efforts into one skill set. ■ I wish you all would become avid readers, not just on LP but also on business, leadership, and technology. ■ I wish all of you would find a true mentor and embrace becoming one as well. ■ I wish more of you would maximize this wonderful learning opportunity more, for it is you who are cheating yourself if you do not. In closing, many of you have said such wonderful things over the past several months about how I have enriched all of your lives. But it is I who has truly been enriched from all of you. A quote from my all time favorite person, Abraham Lincoln: “Upon the subject of education, not presuming to dictate any plan or system respecting it, I can only say that I view it as the most important subject which we as a people can be engaged in.” Thank you all. It has been my pleasure to serve and support all of you. You are a good guy, Gene Smith. From all of us, thank you.






Talks Less.

Tells You More. Fewer false alarms. Far more intelligence. Now, there’s a profitable new reason to replace your existing EAS system. Synergy’s breakthrough technology helps multiply store ROI. • Better EAS sensors reduce backfield and false alarms

• Analytics connect to store systems

• EAS, RFID and Traffic in one modular system

• Actionable reports: shrink by day, by store, and more

• Easily integrates loss event with video capture

• Remote diagnostics: faster install and repair

Reach a Synergy Expert. Call 866-259-7883 or visit www.synergyinretail.com

Safer. Smarter. Tyco.™ © 2016 Tyco Integrated Security. All Rights Reserved. Tyco and Tyco Integrated Security are marks and/or registered trademarks. Unauthorized use is strictly prohibited. All other marks are the property of their respective owners. License information available at www.tycois.com. Sensormatic® Synergy is a registered trademark of Tyco Retail Solutions.

Issuu converts static files into: digital portfolios, online yearbooks, online catalogs, digital photo albums and more. Sign up and create your flipbook.